GM now worth less than toy car maker Mattel

[joeshell383]

Mattel Eclipses GM in Value on Toy-Car Gains: Chart of the Day

Mattel Inc., helped by rising sales of Matchbox and Hot Wheels toy cars, has a larger market value than General Motors Corp. for the first time as record U.S. gasoline prices crimp sales of real cars and trucks.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aVRw0iPJled0&refer=us

As someone who has family that depend on the domestic automakers for their personal livelihoods and local economic success, I do ask that you consider a domestic vehicle (preferrably GM ;)) for your next auto purchase. Their lineups are at least worth a gander, as they have some interesting and innovative new models with good fuel efficiency. Additionally, they have made great strides in quality, and almost all of the vehicles that they sell in the U.S. are still sourced and manufactured in the U.S. or Canada.

[MacDawg]

Very interesting indeed, who wudda thunk it?
The economic crunch and fuel prices are wreaking havoc
On that note, fly Delta ;)

Sorry, I drive an F150 4X4
I wanted to like the Z71, but I couldn't do it

With the Ford I got two-tone paint and chrome running boards
Plus it sits higher

The Z71 has a better interior, in my opinion and I liked it

Alas, in the end, I opted for the Ford

Woof, Woof - Dawg http://homepage.mac.com/k.j.vinson/pawprint.gif

[zebraman]

Lmao wow

[Counterfit]

Forget Mattel, buy Hasbro!


Sorry. Local company, you know.

[yg17]

As someone who has family that depend on the domestic automakers for their personal livelihoods and local economic success, I do ask that you consider a domestic vehicle (preferrably GM ;)) for your next auto purchase. Their lineups are at least worth a gander, as they have some interesting and innovative new models with good fuel efficiency. Additionally, they have made great strides in quality, and almost all of the vehicles that they sell in the U.S. are still sourced and manufactured in the U.S. or Canada.

No thanks, their cars are pieces of junk, and if supporting an American worker was my main concern when buying a car (which it isn't, I don't care if you hate me for that) then I'd buy a Honda built in Ohio, a Toyota built in Kentucky, a Hyundai built in Alabama, a Subaru built in Indiana or a Nissan built in Mississippi.

Sorry, but the big three made their troubles when they decided to build gas guzzling SUVs in times of ever increasing fuel prices. And while I feel sorry for the workers, I'm not going to bail them out by spending thousands of dollars on a sub-par vehicle.

[joeshell383]

No thanks, their cars are pieces of junk, and if supporting an American worker was my main concern when buying a car (which it isn't, I don't care if you hate me for that) then I'd buy a Honda built in Ohio, a Toyota built in Kentucky, a Hyundai built in Alabama, a Subaru built in Indiana or a Nissan built in Mississippi.

Sorry, but the big three made their troubles when they decided to build gas guzzling SUVs in times of ever increasing fuel prices. And while I feel sorry for the workers, I'm not going to bail them out by spending thousands of dollars on a sub-par vehicle.

Of course, as a rational consumer you should be concerned with buying something that you want. That's why I strongly suggest taking a gander at their lineup. It never hurts to look and then make an informed decision.

Trust me, if GM or Ford go down, the whole country will feel it.

Again though, your main concern would rationally be to get a quality vehicle that fits your needs--- could be an import (I recognize that some foreign makes and models are manufactured in the U.S.), or could be a domestic.

[hexonxonx]

Always have purchased and supported GM, namely Chevrolet. I currently own and drive 2 Chevys. I will continue to buy GM till either I can no longer drive or there is no more GM.

Sad to see this news.

[djellison]

I will continue to buy GM till either I can no longer drive or there is no more GM..

So whatever crap they sell, you'll take it. You're helping them fail. If people will simply buy any old crap they produce there's no incentive for them to actually build quality products.

Doug

[mojohanna]

So whatever crap they sell, you'll take it. You're helping them fail. If people will simply buy any old crap they produce there's no incentive for them to actually build quality products.

Doug

I think you are all crazy for assuming that GM and Ford can only produce sub-par quality cars. Sorry that you are either uninformed, uneducated or suffer from your parents and or the media brainwashing you into thinking that the domestic manufacturers can't build quality.

You also can't blame the current economic fortunes on building what the american market demanded (aka SUV's).

And for all of you out there that think SUV's are evil, they are a necessary part of many peoples lives, not just for work, butr also for safe transportation.
For example, I live in an area that regularly sees large amounts of snow. The safety and confidence that the SUV provides makes me rest easier knowing that my wife and kids are exceptionally more safe than a small car when driving in the terrible weather.

Oh, and for build quality, my other car is a 12 year old Buick Riviera that is still going strong. A few things have stopped working, but I expect that out of a 12 year old car. I am confident in stating that my previous car, a Mitsibishi Galant, would barely have made it past 6 years

[eastercat]

Of course, as a rational consumer you should be concerned with buying something that you want. That's why I strongly suggest taking a gander at their lineup. It never hurts to look and then make an informed decision.

Trust me, if GM or Ford go down, the whole country will feel it.

Again though, your main concern would rationally be to get a quality vehicle that fits your needs--- could be an import (I recognize that some foreign makes and models are manufactured in the U.S.), or could be a domestic.
In 2005, I wanted a vehicle that sipped fuel and wouldn't fall apart on me. There were three options: Honda Insight, Honda Civic Hybrid, and Toyota Prius. None of the Detroit idiots made a car that even got 40mpg. As for building reliable cars . . . when's the last time you read rave reviews about them in Consumer Reports?
Now you're asking me to give up my Prius (which gets over 50mpg) and look at cars that still can't get a measly 40mpg. Whatever drugs you're taking, please send them my way. :rolleyes:
GM and Ford dug their graves, jumped into them, and are burying themselves with their continued stupidity.

Esther

[Dont Hurt Me]

The GM executives have and are making millions no matter how poor the company does.

Short sighted overpaid executives are killing this company.

[nsbio]

Couple of months back I was shopping for a small car that had good handling and had a manual transmission. What are GM's offerings in the segment? Cobalt? Puleeze! The only real choices were either Japanese makes of VW. Went with Mazda3 and do not regret this for a minute :).

GM is good at making gas-guzzling monsters as well as rental cars, for which there is less and less demand now. The reality is that there are high-demand cars for which there are waiting lists (try to buy a Prius, for example). GM has not adapted to the changing market, presumably due to subpar management, and therefore fully deserves the position they are currently in.

[nbs2]

Now you're asking me to give up my Prius (which gets over 50mpg) and look at cars that still can't get a measly 40mpg. Whatever drugs you're taking, please send them my way. :rolleyes:

Wow. All the guy said was to take a look at the cars, not invest your life savings in GM/F stock. If you aren't willing to take a look at what is being offered, how can you call yourself an informed buyer?

As for refusing a make for previous or current quality issues with some or many models, I wonder how old most of you are. Hyundai was a miserable wretch of a make for many years when they first hit American shores. Their cars were fine in Korea, but for some reason quality couldn't make the ocean crossings. Even now, the perception many experienced buyers have is that they are poor vehicles.

If you are looking for a vehicle that you will hold on to until you drive it into the ground, the American makes are worth a solid consideration. Build quality is not as consistent, but you will find that overall the quality is comparable to that of other makes. Factor in that you will be getting a make discount because of the negative press (or perhaps you won't be paying the make premium), and you will come out ahead in the long term. If you plan on selling it, then it makes sense to pay the premium for the higher resale value.

As for the unstoppable quality of the Japanese, my Civic gets 30mpg, primarily highway. I keep the car in as great a condition as I can, running all maintenance possible, and avoid driving more than 5 over the limit. In fact, I try to keep to the limit as much as possible. Oh, and if the service department had found what is making that grinding noise in my vehicle on one of my previous visits, I wouldn't be hoping for them to find it on my next one. Honda quality, my muscular buttocks.

[quagmire]

I think you are all crazy for assuming that GM and Ford can only produce sub-par quality cars. Sorry that you are either uninformed, uneducated or suffer from your parents and or the media brainwashing you into thinking that the domestic manufacturers can't build quality.

You also can't blame the current economic fortunes on building what the american market demanded (aka SUV's).

And for all of you out there that think SUV's are evil, they are a necessary part of many peoples lives, not just for work, butr also for safe transportation.
For example, I live in an area that regularly sees large amounts of snow. The safety and confidence that the SUV provides makes me rest easier knowing that my wife and kids are exceptionally more safe than a small car when driving in the terrible weather.

Oh, and for build quality, my other car is a 12 year old Buick Riviera that is still going strong. A few things have stopped working, but I expect that out of a 12 year old car. I am confident in stating that my previous car, a Mitsibishi Galant, would barely have made it past 6 years

While you can't blame them for producing what the consumer wanted, you can blame them for being short sighted and didn't have vehicles ready when the consumers taste changed.

I wouldn't be calling GM vehicles subpar anymore. The new CTS an Malibu is proof GM can produce competitive cars. The Cobalt XFE( though the interior quality is on the cheap side) gets 25/36 which is the same fuel economy as the Civic. The Cobalt SS Turbocharged gets 22/30. The Civic Si gets 22/29. The Malibu 4 banger/6 speed auto gets 22/32. The Camry gets 21/31. The Impala with the 3.9 V6 gets 18/28. The Avalon gets 19/28. Their cars are certainly competitive now. you can only say they can't compete against the Prius and Camry hybrid right now. Which the Volt will change that when it comes in 2010. Out of the Big 3, GM is in the best position to make a turnaround right now.

Oh and for Consumer reports, for a magazine that claims to be unbiased they always had Toyota vehicles at good reliability even for new models that just came out. Luckily, they had egg on their face when the Camry and Tundra had some pretty major problems........

^^ nbs, is your Civic the Si?

[nick9191]

So whatever crap they sell, you'll take it. You're helping them fail. If people will simply buy any old crap they produce there's no incentive for them to actually build quality products.

Doug
That should be Microsoft's mission statement.

[Lord Blackadder]

I'm not interested in American cars, with a few exceptions. This is not through any lack of patriotism or Euro-snobbiness etc. The Japanese out-compete us on quality and fuel economy (and often performance), while the Europeans usually lead the way in style and design (and diesel technology, if we ever get it).

The only GM vehicles I would consider would be a work truck if I was in the market for one (I'm not, at least at the moment), or a Corvette (way out of my price range). I was interested to hear that GM is bringing the Opel Astra over here as a Saturn, but I guess that's outside the scope of this discussion (made in Belgium) and anyway it posts some very disappointing fuel economy numbers for a small car.

GM has been doing some interesting experiments with diesels in the Corvette, but why on earth debut a diesel in Corvette?!? Put it in a little Cobalt so it gets 45+mpg for goodness' sake! They are also looking into swapping some of the larger V6 and V8 engines for a turbo four, ostensibly to improve fuel economy without sacrificing too much power. An interesting if by no means revolutionary (c.f. Passat/A6) move.

GM is certainly not the only one with problems. Compare the American Ford Focus (http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/focus/?referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eford%2Ecom&glbcmp=ford|vehicles) and the European version (http://www.ford.co.uk/ns7/focmca/focmca_photos/foc0108_ext_gal/-/-/-/-). The European Focus is a totally redesigned car whereas the American model soldiers on with the same platform it had in 1999.

The Euro version comes with a choice of seven engines, including two diesels (one of which gets over 50mpg combined cycle) and a punchy 166HP gasoline engine that still tops 30mpg combined cycle. The American version, on the other hand, gets one, yes, one engine...the 2.0L four we get here in the states is a decent engine but Euro buyers can choose from a range of much more efficient engines if they are going for economy or drop just a little economy and get over 20HP extra. WHY FORD, WHY?

I like the Focus, I was very close to buying one...but that was four years ago and Ford has done nothing with the car other than reskin it (the new sheet metal is hideous IMO, but that's a subjective statement). The original Focus was an excellent car - in 1999. The SVT Focus was also an excellent car, but is a niche vehicle and was only produced a couple of years anyway.

My point is that I believe that the Big Three can't figure out how to build a vehicle people want to buy, unless you are talking trucks and Buicks (and Buick buyers are dropping like flies, with an average age measured in geological time).

Coddling and protection by the government has left American automakers increasingly less able to compete. Take away fleet, government and truck sales and it is a very scary situation for them in the consumer market. They have the resources to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, but do they have a workable plan.

Whenever I shop for a car I make it a point to test American vehicles because I want the US to make good cars so I can buy a domestic vehicle I'm proud of...so far that hasn't happened.

[McGiord]

North American auto manufacturers big problem: too many engineers for a few new products for the North American market.

In my opinion GM should keep only 3 brands in NA: Cadillac for Luxury, GMC or Pontiac for performance, and Chevy for the rest.
GM is doing great in other continents and what they are mostly selling are high end priced vehicles and small economy cars, the latter mostly sourced from South Korea GMDAT engineering.
GM also has a great flex fuel technology to a good extent, see the Brazilian market and you will know what I am talking about. Sugar Cane based ethanol.
GM is currently developing a lot hybrids and the electrical Volt that will be out in 2010 i think.
The key for this market to evolve is that the fuel companies allow it.
The brand recognition that Toyota has is the big challenge to overcome for the NA big 3.
________
vaaapp vaporizer (http://essentialvaaappvaporizer.com)

[quagmire]

GM has been doing some interesting experiments with diesels in the Corvette, but why on earth debut a diesel in Corvette?!? Put it in a little Cobalt so it gets 45+mpg for goodness' sake! They are also looking into swapping some of the larger V6 and V8 engines for a turbo four, ostensibly to improve fuel economy without sacrificing too much power. An interesting if by no means revolutionary (c.f. Passat/A6) move.

GM is also testing out HCCI which is a gas engine running off compression like diesels do and switch to spark when needed.

Like I said, GM is in the best position for a turnaround. Their products are improving and GM is finally getting a bit smart. As they're selling Hummer and killing GMC( all signs point to it. Next gen Acadia killed, Ridgeline like truck has been killed. It was GMC or Pontiac). GM is doing exceptionally well abroad. It is the NA operation that is killing them. Like I said, GM's products are getting better. Just look at the next gen LaCrosse's interior.

http://images.leftlanenews.com/content/may2008/buick-lacrosse-inside-1.jpg

[yg17]

Of course, as a rational consumer you should be concerned with buying something that you want. That's why I strongly suggest taking a gander at their lineup. It never hurts to look and then make an informed decision.

Trust me, if GM or Ford go down, the whole country will feel it.

Again though, your main concern would rationally be to get a quality vehicle that fits your needs--- could be an import (I recognize that some foreign makes and models are manufactured in the U.S.), or could be a domestic.

I took a very quick gander at their lineup, saw that they had nothing, and moved on. I got a VW and don't regret it for a minute. No American car can come close to the fuel economy, reliability and build quality that I get from my GTI

[Lord Blackadder]

In my opinion GM should keep only 3 brands in NA: Cadillac for Luxury, GMC or Pontiac for performance, and Chevy for the rest.

I agree, GM is selling too many brands...it dilutes the product line and reduces profit margins.

GM is doing great in other continents and what they are mostly selling are high end priced vehicles and small economy cars, the latter mostly sourced from South Korea GMDAT engineering.

Most foreign GM products are just that - designed, built and sold outside the US. Which is a problem as I see it, or is at least not to the credit of GM North America.

GM also has a great flex fuel technology to a good extent, see the Brazilian market and you will know what I am talking about. Sugar Cane based ethanol.

This seemed like a good idea till recently, when we all realized that we were burning our food as fuel and worldwide food prices skyrocketed...it's still a good idea in places where it is sustainable, i.e. not interfering with food production.

GM is currently developing a lot hybrids and the electrical Volt that will be out in 2010 i think.

Hybrids are a good idea though I am mystified as to why GM chooses to introduce hybrid technology in big fat expensive trucks like the suburban - unless it is to mask the bulk and expense of the hybrid drivetrains. Small cars benefit the most from this technology. A Hybrid Cobalt is what GM needs to be selling.

I took a very quick gander at their lineup, saw that they had nothing, and moved on. I got a VW and don't regret it for a minute. No American car can come close to the fuel economy, reliability and build quality that I get from my GTI

I very much wanted a GTI, but could't afford it. Of course, the GTI runs 91 octane, so while it gets decent fuel economy you are paying a bit more for fuel.

[quagmire]

Hybrids are a good idea though I am mystified as to why GM chooses to introduce hybrid technology in big fat expensive trucks like the suburban - unless it is to mask the bulk and expense of the hybrid drivetrains. Small cars benefit the most from this technology. A Hybrid Cobalt is what GM needs to be selling.

Make the inefficient vehicles more efficient. Plus I don't think the 2 mode system can fit in a car like the Malibu/Cobalt.

[yg17]

I very much wanted a GTI, but could't afford it. Of course, the GTI runs 91 octane, so while it gets decent fuel economy you are paying a bit more for fuel.


True, but the fuel economy is far better than my old car (which ran 97) so I think I'm still coming out ahead

[IJ Reilly]

I drive one of these:

http://matchbox.zsebehazy.com/dodge/mbdodge1.jpg

Have I done wrong?

[Dont Hurt Me]

LOL, thats funny.

[Lord Blackadder]

I drive one of these:

I used to have one of those, in silver. It was a bit of a tight fit.

[IJ Reilly]

I used to have one of those, in silver. It was a bit of a tight fit.

Ah, but the fuel economy... especially if some kid gives you a good push!

[djellison]

I think you are all crazy for assuming that GM and Ford can only produce sub-par quality cars.

I'm European and drive a Ford Focus.

[Lord Blackadder]

I'm European and drive a Ford Focus.

See my earlier post and you'll understand why I don't...and why you'd probably be driving something else too if you lived in North America.

[Counterfit]

The safety and confidence that the SUV provides makes me rest easier knowing that my wife and kids are exceptionally more safe than a small car when driving in the terrible weather.

You would have been better off with a Subaru. They have some of the safest cars on the road (including the Impreza), and have no trouble getting through snow.
No American car can come close to the fuel economy, reliability and build quality that I get from my GTI

VW beating anyone in reliability (electronics-wise) is still a foreign concept to me.

[quagmire]

You would have been better off with a Subaru. They have some of the safest cars on the road (including the Impreza), and have no trouble getting through snow.

So safe that the jaws of life has trouble cutting through the steel structure. ;)

[a104375]

that is so funny.. oh well GM had it coming making sub par cars, compared to foreign made

[yg17]

VW beating anyone in reliability (electronics-wise) is still a foreign concept to me.


So far, so good.

And frankly, I'll take shoddier electronics over a shoddier powertrain any day. A broken power window motor isn't going to leave me stranded anywhere. But I don't have enough fingers to count the number of times our old GM cars were towed away to the repair shop.

[Lord Blackadder]

VW beating anyone in reliability (electronics-wise) is still a foreign concept to me.

My father had an '88 Jetta and it was the worst car I have ever had personal experience with. Everything that could go wrong did go wrong. It was absolutely horrible. I have heard that the German-made VWs are significantly more reliable than the Mexican-built Jetta/Bora, though I have no facts to back that up. I have to say though, that when that Jetta was actually running it was a nice car. Unfortunately it wasn't running all that often.

To be fair I haven't had personal experience with any VW made after 1999, though I do have a friend with a New Beetle and it has had a lot of electrical issues.

With that being said only high resale values have kept me from getting a VW. They really own the hatchback market in the US with the Golf, and are the only manufacturer besides MB with a decent selection of diesel cars. When my last car was wrecked in November I searched for a 1.8T Golf/Jetta or possibly a TDI, but people are simply asking too much for them on the used market. That's why I have my Subaru.

[IJ Reilly]

If were looking for a hatchback today, I'd seriously consider the Honda Fit. I haven't heard a bad word about the car.

[Lord Blackadder]

If were looking for a hatchback today, I'd seriously consider the Honda Fit. I haven't heard a bad word about the car.

I rode around in a brand new red one this summer and was VERY impressed I must say. It makes a Civic feel flabby, and after being in the Fit my Forester felt like a truck. If I was in the market for a new car I would take a long, hard look at the Fit.

[donga]

i think it's unfair to blame the domestics for not adapting to the market. who could actually see gas prices increase by so much?

it takes time for factories to change production, and they are being forced to change now.

[Lord Blackadder]

The domestics aren't the only ones to be shortsighted, but compared to overseas competition their product line is very poorly suited to a world in a fuel crisis.

Pretty much every major car manufacturer outside the US has a line of fuel efficient diesels and small city cars while the bread and butter products of US car makers are still mid-size sedans and full-size trucks with V6 and V8 engines. Consumers share the blame of course, but either way the US is behind in the trend towards more fuel-efficient cars. Research in the US is still targeted towards "have your cake and eat it too" hybrid SUVs that still get worse fuel economy than small hatchbacks and diesels.

[IJ Reilly]

I rode around in a brand new red one this summer and was VERY impressed I must say. It makes a Civic feel flabby, and after being in the Fit my Forester felt like a truck. If I was in the market for a new car I would take a long, hard look at the Fit.

Well, your Forester is a truck. ;)

The price is right on the Fit also, and I believe the fuel economy is the best or nearly the best for a non-hybrid.

[Lord Blackadder]

Well, your Forester is a truck. ;)

The price is right on the Fit also, and I believe the fuel economy is the best or nearly the best for a non-hybrid.

It isn't quite a truck - I've been driving around in a Ford F-350 in the field and trust me it ain't that bad. :eek::D

I think the Fit gets better mileage than the eco-king Geo Metro does, once you adjust the old EPA ratings.

[zblaxberg]

I hate gm, my toyota rav4 will live longer and run better then one of those gas guzzlers.

[quagmire]

I hate gm, my toyota rav4 will live longer and run better then one of those gas guzzlers.

How insightful. :rolleyes: What is the basis of your assumption?

[yg17]

i think it's unfair to blame the domestics for not adapting to the market. who could actually see gas prices increase by so much?

All of the imports adjusted. Actually, I guess that's not quite accurate. They didn't bet the farm on gas guzzling SUVs remaining a trend like domestics did

[Sun Baked]

Even though it has a really low market cap, there is still all those $100's Billion bills in debt you have to add to the purchase price.

Major big poison pill to swallow...

[GSMiller]

Always have purchased and supported GM, namely Chevrolet. I currently own and drive 2 Chevys. I will continue to buy GM till either I can no longer drive or there is no more GM.

Sad to see this news.

Same here. I have always driven a Chevrolet and have never had any problems with them so why change? No car company is going to build perfect cars 100% of the time and it's ludicrous to see some of my fellow Macintosh users thinking they should.

[ErikCLDR]

Hahaha.

I thought this thread was going to say "GM now worth less than toy...ota"

[joeshell383]

I hate gm, my toyota rav4 will live longer and run better then one of those gas guzzlers.

Your comment is exactly one of the blind, unsubstantiated misconceptions that is killing our domestic auto industry. Do we really want to lose another industry?

http://www.automedia.com/NewCarBuyersGuide2007/photos/2007/Chevrolet/Cobalt/Sedan/2007_Chevy_Cobalt_ext_1.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Pontiac-G5-coupe.jpg

Excluding the Sienna and Matrix, Toyota has 7 crossovers/SUVs and 2 pickup truck lines (but dare we mention them, or the fact that up until about 6-9 months ago both Toyota and Honda were desperately trying to make inroads in the full-size pickup arena). This Toyota=Eco-Friendly is a myth that has formed on the basis of one (halo) car. I suppose I congratulate their marketing and overall business accomplishments and success.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/2009_Toyota_Venza_NY.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Toyota_FJ_Cruiser.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/06-08_Toyota_RAV4_Limited.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/08_Toyota_Highlander_Limited.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/06-07_Toyota_4Runner.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/2008_Toyota_Land_Cruiser.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/2008_Toyota_Sequoia_Platinum.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/67/05-07_Toyota_Tacoma_regcab.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Toyota_Tundra_Crew_Max_Limited.jpg

[Counterfit]

Well, your Forester is a truck. ;)
So then the Impreza must be a truck too, because that's what the Forester was based on.
And I can assure you, the Impreza is not a truck.
All of the imports adjusted. Actually, I guess that's not quite accurate. They didn't bet the farm on gas guzzling SUVs remaining a trend like domestics did

They already had small efficient cars for the Japanese market where cars are taxed on wheelbase and track (center of tires on one side to the center of the tire on the other side), and such, due to there not being much room in the cities, and the absence of a need for long trips due to cheap domestic air fare and a solid rail network. Much of the same goes for Europe, just without the taxes on wheelbase and track, and I think higher taxes on gas.
So all they really had to do was tweak a few of those models for U.S. safety standards, change the guages to MPH/F/whatever, and flip the dash. That takes a lot less money than designing a car from scratch.
Of course, Ford could have done that with the new Focus, but they were dumb and decided not to. And then when they redesigned the Mondeo, which has been getting great reviews, they completely ignored the possibility of bringing over here with regards to safety standards.

[yg17]

Your comment is exactly one of the blind, unsubstantiated misconceptions that is killing our domestic auto industry. Do we really want to lose another industry?
No one wants to lose it, I'm just not going to do anything to save it. If they manufacture something worthwhile, then I'll gladly take a look, but I'm not going to spend that kind of money on something I don't want just to save a company that made some poor choices.

I believe in Darwinism, and I think that it can apply to corporations just as much as species.

[IJ Reilly]

Your comment is exactly one of the blind, unsubstantiated misconceptions that is killing our domestic auto industry. Do we really want to lose another industry?

We need more photos. And larger, please.

So then the Impreza must be a truck too, because that's what the Forester was based on.
And I can assure you, the Impreza is not a truck.

Well it was meant as a joke.

[yg17]

Excluding the Sienna and Matrix, Toyota has 7 crossovers/SUVs and 2 pickup truck lines (but dare we mention them, or the fact that up until about 6-9 months ago both Toyota and Honda were desperately trying to make inroads in the full-size pickup arena). This Toyota=Eco-Friendly is a myth that has formed on the basis of one (halo) car. I suppose I congratulate their marketing and overall business accomplishments and success.

So what were you trying to prove by posting all of those enormous photos? That Toyota sells big cars? Duh. Now, I can post huge photos of H2s, Escalades, Yukons, F-350s, Expeditions and Durangos to counter your point, or I'll use facts. Since I know forum etiquette, I'll go the facts route.

Average MPG by car company for the 2007 model year:

Domestic passenger
Daimler-Chrysler: 28.6 mpg (-36% overall sales)
Ford: 29 mpg (-28% overall sales)
General Motors: 29.9 mpg (-18% overall sales)
Toyota: 31.6 mpg (-21% overall sales)
Honda: 33.5 mpg (+1.1% overall sales)


Imported passenger
Daimler-Chrysler: 24.7 mpg (-36% overall sales)
Ford: 29.9 mpg (-28% overall sales)
General Motors: 31.9 mpg (-18% overall sales)
Toyota: 38.5 mpg (-21% overall sales)
Honda: 39.6 mpg (+1.1% overall sales)


Light trucks
Ford: 22.2 mpg (-28% overall sales)
Daimler-Chrysler: 22.6 mpg (-36% overall sales)
General Motors: 22.6 mpg (-18% overall sales)
Toyota: 23.9 mpg (-21% overall sales)
Honda: 25 mpg (+1.1% overall sales)


Source (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/07/fleet-economy.html)



Well, isn't that a surprise? Honda and Toyota have the most fuel efficient cars. The big 3 have the least fuel efficient cars, and 2 of them have the biggest reduction in sales. Honda's cars are by far the best on gas, and they had an INCREASE in their sales this year while the others had a decrease. What a shocker :rolleyes: Maybe there is something to this whole fuel economy thing after all. Maybe the big 3 have themselves to blame, and not those of us who buy imports, for the trouble they're in.

[themadchemist]

Maybe GM would be better off if it used the metal in its sub-par cars to make two-inch die cast models of quality cars.

[zblaxberg]

To OP, you are probably going to piss off a couple of Moderators posting like that, next time put in TIMG tags instead of IMG. Those photos are way too large and inconvenient.

[Lord Blackadder]

Well it was meant as a joke.

Don't worry IJ, I laughed. :D

A colleague of mine who also owns a Forester has been in a running debate (half jokingly) with me about whether the Forester is a wagon (as I contend) or an SUV (his choice).

[IJ Reilly]

Don't worry IJ, I laughed. :D

Yeah, but you're easy.

A colleague of mine who also owns a Forester has been in a running debate (half jokingly) with me about whether the Forester is a wagon (as I contend) or an SUV (his choice).

This "crossover" concept has me a bit wary. The car makers seem to want to leave the customer with the idea that they're actually buying a trendy SUV -- without all the heft, and the guilt, I suppose. Hence the joke about it being a truck. It would be if it could be, and probably is in the minds of a lot of owners.

[Lord Blackadder]

This "crossover" concept has me a bit wary. The car makers seem to want to leave the customer with the idea that they're actually buying a trendy SUV -- without all the heft, and the guilt, I suppose. Hence the joke about it being a truck. It would be if it could be, and probably is in the minds of a lot of owners.

I know, and I hate the thought of the Forester being an SUV...it's a wagon! It gets better fuel economy and has better handling than an SUV, and while it is useless off road (Forester fanatics will argue that) it won't get stuck in a fairground parking lot or most muddy dirt roads.

The crossover concept is lame, and the more I drive this car the less I like crossover-ness. I want something that is clearly a truck or a car, not the bad halves of both.

[ryannel2003]

Ok so GM is worth less than Mattel. Big deal. Yes, GM has put out some crappy products, but the new models are steadily improving in quality and reliability. The new CTS comes to mind, along with the new Malibu, and even they're trucks are good. So GM's problem is their bread and butter are trucks/SUV's, while Toyota's is the Camry. Since gas is expensive, this is the reason for the failing sales and low net worth. Not because they can't make a good product. Oh and the comment about GM's powertrains being unreliable is new to me. The only problem child I can recall in the past 10 years has been Cadillac's Northstar, but it has been revised so new issues are few and far between.

Let's look at Toyota though: the new Camry has had more issues than any generation before it, and the Tundra isn't exactly a winner either. So while most people think Toyota is a "perfect" auto maker, they aren't. They've had many, many issues with their line-up for the past couple of years due to careless mistakes that should've never made it out of the factory. I just got out of my 2000 Camry and while it was a great car, it did have some issues. So even Toyota screws up sometimes.

[IJ Reilly]

The crossover concept is lame, and the more I drive this car the less I like crossover-ness. I want something that is clearly a truck or a car, not the bad halves of both.

It's 100% marketing-speak. Nobody wants to drive a "station wagon" anymore.

This discussion reminded me of a photo I took several years ago.

[quagmire]

Ok so GM is worth less than Mattel. Big deal. Yes, GM has put out some crappy products, but the new models are steadily improving in quality and reliability. The new CTS comes to mind, along with the new Malibu, and even they're trucks are good. So GM's problem is their bread and butter are trucks/SUV's, while Toyota's is the Camry. Since gas is expensive, this is the reason for the failing sales and low net worth. Not because they can't make a good product. Oh and the comment about GM's powertrains being unreliable is new to me. The only problem child I can recall in the past 10 years has been Cadillac's Northstar, but it has been revised so new issues are few and far between.

There was also the whole 3.1 V6 engine family fiasco with the intake manifold blowing.

[Lord Blackadder]

It's 100% marketing-speak. Nobody wants to drive a "station wagon" anymore.

At least the Germans and Swedes have stuck to wagons...I'd take a 5-Series wagon over a SUV any day...

There was also the whole 3.1 V6 engine family fiasco with the intake manifold blowing.

And the 2.2L Cavalier head gasket woes.

[ryannel2003]

There was also the whole 3.1 V6 engine family fiasco with the intake manifold blowing.

My grandfather had a '98 Monte Carlo w/ the 3.1L and never had a bit of trouble. It's funny though, I have never seen a 3.1 or 3.4 in my dealers garage with problems; Mostly Northstars, but besides the headgaskets and rear main oil leaks they're great engines.

[Lord Blackadder]

My grandfather had a '98 Monte Carlo w/ the 3.1L and never had a bit of trouble. It's funny though, I have never seen a 3.1 or 3.4 in my dealers garage with problems; Mostly Northstars, but besides the headgaskets and rear main oil leaks they're great engines.

I have personally seen several 3.1L engines with the intake manifold issue. I don't think the 3.4 was involved with that problem.

I have to admit the silliest GM car out there at the moment has to be the cars that use the LS4 engine. 5.3L pushrod V8...and front wheel drive. What on EARTH were they thinking?

[quagmire]

I have personally seen several 3.1L engines with the intake manifold issue. I don't think the 3.4 was involved with that problem.

The 3.4 was also involved.

[ryannel2003]

I have personally seen several 3.1L engines with the intake manifold issue. I don't think the 3.4 was involved with that problem.

I have to admit the silliest GM car out there at the moment has to be the cars that use the LS4 engine. 5.3L pushrod V8...and front wheel drive. What on EARTH were they thinking?

I agree, GM needs to get rid of them. My grandfather has a '06 Impala SS and while it's a nice car, it certainly isn't sporty. Fast? Yes. Interesting to drive? No. Torque steer is a bitch too. For some reason, my Seville STS doesn't have the same problem with that.

[Counterfit]

Well it was meant as a joke.

I see.


Also, I contend that the RidgeLine should not qualify as a truck.

[ErikCLDR]

I'll admit Chevy/GM/Cadillac has finally made a decent SUV. The Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon Escalade's are ugly, but they finally have a decent interior (maybe now they are worth closer to the $40,000+ that they cost). That is great... now that no one wants to buy an SUV because gas is $4.50/gal. They still have the truck market but I think the C/K 1500 has the tundra and even the titan as a pretty strong competitors.

The biggest problem I think with GM other than the quality in some of their cars and their excessive rebranding is Name.
- A Buick is thought of an old person car, I think most people would rather have a honda or toyota.
- Cadillacs are making a come back, but I think 9/10 people would tell you they'd rather have a Lexus, Acura, BMW, or Mercedes. They're kind of a niche car.
- Chevy cars- eh, its just an american car, I think Japanese cars seem "cooler"
- Pontiac- In my mind a dying brand, not very popular, just a step up from a chevy
- Saturn- The aura is nice, but I think the name/history just turns people
away
- Hummer- A symbol of war and gas guzzling in a country that has high gas prices, is in an eco/green fad, and that is currently at war... great

The brand name of things really has a lot to do with what people buy. Why do people buy $50 shirts when they can buy the same thing without the label for $10? I think many of the American brands are associated with either being really cheap or popular among elder folk and thats partially why sales have dropped.

As a young person, I would much rather drive a Honda than a Buick or Pontiac or Chevy. To me a buick is an old person's car, my grandpa used to own one and thats what old people drive. Pontiac are cheap cars that try to look cool but aren't and are just chevy's underneath. And a Chevy is just a run of the mill basic car built to be produced as cheaply as possible, and the lack of quality will show. A Honda at least has a little sportiness to it and is known for its quality. Obviously what I have just said are generalizations and may not be true anymore, but I think thats how the everyday consumer thinks.

[WOZhipper]

USA automaker dug the hole for 15 years and now they will have to pay the price for greed and a VERY LARGE CONSUMER BASE who was brainwashed into the SUV craze and having old engines with 8 cilinders and a 2 ton vehicle.

Ford lineup is a Joke they have more SUV than pass cars, their arketing was so good that John Doe bought Suv even if they did not need it or used them offroad.

Take for example the new engines by european manefacturers, Ill give you some examples of engines years ahead from US junk.

Peugeot-BMW, 1.6 liter turbo engine (used in the Mini, the 207,308 etc) super powerful 240lbs torque and a very low consumption.

VW-AUDI group 2.0 liter turbo and 1.4 supercharged engines porwerful yet economic to operate.

The 1.4 turbo diesel by Renault and the 1.6 liter diesel used in Fords. Heck even th e Honda V6 diesel has INCREDIBLE torque and low noise...

And th einteriors...OUCH what a difference, just check the european Mondeo... GM Ford and DC are in really deeep .....

[crazytom]

Since the late 80's, I've always had fuel economy as my top priority. My first car was (and still is) a '91 Geo Metro....last fill up gave me 51 mpg (some hypermiling involved). My second (family) car is a '99 Saturn SL (40 mpg)---also before GM snapped them up and messed up the works. My next car WILL get better than either of those, but no one American company has made anything better than what I'm currently getting. I would have liked to have seen some progressive thinking from an American company. They could have made the Chevy Aveo an econobox, but somehow botched the whole deal on fuel economy....though it is a inexpensive car....hell, even the Yaris only tops around 40-43 mpg highway.

I'm envious of those of you who want a big car: you have lots of options. I want a fuel efficient car (in my mind, one that gets better than 60 mpg)...nothing fancy, just a commuter car that will get me from A to B safely and cheaply. Given the pace of change in America, it will be late 2014 before I can get something like that, and we'll probably be in a deep depression because people will be spending the majority of their money on fuel/power and from the residual effect of gas prices on everything else bought and sold.

[quagmire]

Since the late 80's, I've always had fuel economy as my top priority. My first car was (and still is) a '91 Geo Metro....last fill up gave me 51 mpg (some hypermiling involved). My second (family) car is a '99 Saturn SL (40 mpg)---also before GM snapped them up and messed up the works. My next car WILL get better than either of those, but no one American company has made anything better than what I'm currently getting. I would have liked to have seen some progressive thinking from an American company. They could have made the Chevy Aveo an econobox, but somehow botched the whole deal on fuel economy....though it is a inexpensive car....hell, even the Yaris only tops around 40-43 mpg highway.

Saturn was always a part of GM. Geo was also GM though some( if not all) were rebadged Toyota's.

[ryannel2003]

GM has shown they can build a good car. Now if they can keep up the momentum, it should help them out in the long run. What pisses me off is the media will spin this around, and while the CTS and Malibu are great now, about 4 years from now they'll be talking about how much they suck. They did the same thing with the Seville, the original CTS, and quite a few other GM vehicles.

It's all about singing praises to Toyota, but when the screw up people almost ignore it. In my opinion, Honda is doing a much better job with their line-up right now (and I'm not a fan of Honda). When the economy improves, hopefully GM will as well.

[ErikCLDR]

[QUOTE=WOZhipper;5719087]
Ford lineup is a Joke they have more SUV than pass cars, their arketing was so good that John Doe bought Suv even if they did not need it or used them offroad.
/QUOTE]

The new Taurus isn't bad and I hear the fusion is decent. But I agree with you, they have too many trucks and all of them are very outdated. The "new" trucks look almost identical to the old ones.

If we want to talk about jokes, lets talk about Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep. The only good cars they have are the Wrangler, Charger, and 300. The latter two I don't like but seem to be at least somewhat popular.

[crazytom]

Saturn was always a part of GM. Geo was also GM though some( if not all) were rebadged Toyota's.

Right you are, I thought Saturn was independent of GM... Saturn messed up by moving away from light weight materials, making their cars heavier, more powerful, hence, less efficient. I liked the way Saturn started, but I guess they got greedy.

But:

The Metro was based on the Suzuki Cultus...GM just 'used' the good idea.

[IJ Reilly]

Right you are, I thought Saturn was independent of GM... Saturn messed up by moving away from light weight materials, making their cars heavier, more powerful, hence, less efficient. I liked the way Saturn started, but I guess they got greedy.

Not really, it was just the usual short-sighted thinking from GM. Saturn was always a division of GM, but at the start they were treated like an independent company for purposes of research and development, design and marketing. It was exactly the sort of clean slate exercise that GM needed. Saturn was an almost immediate success, which apparently caused the big brains in GM's top management to reconsider the entire arrangement. Now Saturn shares platforms with the other GM nameplates, so the brand has completely lost its distinctiveness and edge. Now we know why GM is worth less than Mattel.

[quagmire]

Not really, it was just the usual short-sighted thinking from GM. Saturn was always a division of GM, but at the start they were treated like an independent company for purposes of research and development, design and marketing. It was exactly the sort of clean slate exercise that GM needed. Saturn was an almost immediate success, which apparently caused the big brains in GM's top management to reconsider the entire arrangement. Now Saturn shares platforms with the other GM nameplates, so the brand has completely lost its distinctiveness and edge. Now we know why GM is worth less than Mattel.

More like big bad brother Chevy got mad Saturn got R&D money that they thought they deserved due to being the bread and butter brand. :p But yeah, Saturn was starved of product until the Vue came out and is now being transformed into Opel's US distribution arm. Though the Insignia based Aura was put on hold.

To be fair, its distinctiveness lied in the buying experience and polymer panels. The buying public( probably with the help of the media) didn't take too well with their cars panels being made out of "plastic" due to the panel gaps, etc( the gaps were necessary for the expansion of the material in heat and cold). Though in my experience at least, the experience remains top notch. Buying my Aura was low pressure and the sales person we dealt with was a very nice guy. When ever we bring it in for an oil change they wash the car for free. Then when Saturn sent around replicas of the North American Award to owners( I got it), that impressed me even more. Let me say if Saturn survives in the future, they will be on the top of my list of cars when looking at new cars.

Right you are, I thought Saturn was independent of GM... Saturn messed up by moving away from light weight materials, making their cars heavier, more powerful, hence, less efficient. I liked the way Saturn started, but I guess they got greedy.


Again to be fair, the whole industry added weight to their cars. Any weight savings polymer gave Saturn vehicles was easily cancelled out by the beefing up of the cars structure so it could still withstand impact with another vehicle.

[IJ Reilly]

More like big bad brother Chevy got mad Saturn got R&D money that they thought they deserved due to being the bread and butter brand. :p But yeah, Saturn was starved of product until the Vue came out and is now being transformed into Opel's US distribution arm. Though the Insignia based Aura was put on hold.

To be fair, its distinctiveness lied in the buying experience and polymer panels. The buying public( probably with the help of the media) didn't take too well with their cars panels being made out of "plastic" due to the panel gaps, etc( the gaps were necessary for the expansion of the material in heat and cold). Though in my experience at least, the experience remains top notch. Buying my Aura was low pressure and the sales person we dealt with was a very nice guy. When ever we bring it in for an oil change they wash the car for free. Then when Saturn sent around replicas of the North American Award to owners( I got it), that impressed me even more. Let me say if Saturn survives in the future, they will be on the top of my list of cars when looking at new cars.

It wasn't only the plastic panels, though, which GM used for some other cars. Saturn's platforms were developed for Saturn cars, unlike the rest of GM, where the brands were interchangeable. Internal corporate politics killed the promise which was Saturn. When that happened, I knew it was effectively all over for GM.

[quagmire]

It wasn't only the plastic panels, though, which GM used for some other cars. Saturn's platforms were developed for Saturn cars, unlike the rest of GM, where the brands were interchangeable. Internal corporate politics killed the promise which was Saturn. When that happened, I knew it was effectively all over for GM.

The only real Saturn was the S Series. Every other vehicle was based off a reworked platform from another brand( Ion was based off the Delta platform which underpins the Cobalt, L Series was a reworked old gen Opel Vectra, Vue was based off a short wheel base of the Theta platform which the longer wheel base underpins the Equinox). It wasn't a bad thing, but you're right the brand lost its distinctiveness.

[IJ Reilly]

The only real Saturn was the S Series. Every other vehicle was based off a reworked platform from another brand( Ion was based off the Delta platform which underpins the Cobalt, L Series was a reworked old gen Opel Vectra, Vue was based off a short wheel base of the Theta platform which the longer wheel base underpins the Equinox). It wasn't a bad thing, but you're right the brand lost its distinctiveness.

Yes, but the S-series was made from the start and for quite a number of years, until Saturn was reabsorbed by the mother ship.

[Rodimus Prime]

I would not write off the big 3 as crap but do look at their line up. They are paying for the crap they made in the early 90's in relieablity which has gotten better in more recent years and now is up to par with every one else. Honda has gone down...

That being said for me I am looking at getting a new car in 1-2 years to replace my sentra (I want something bigger like a mid size car instead of a compact)

As it stand

GM - nothing that interested me. The Volt shows promise but I like a way to charge it as it stands but that might be different in a years time.

Ford - It has the fussion which as it stands has my attention.
Crystler - Sorry to many problems with those cars and my family so not even in the running. No trust what so ever

As for the imports
Nissan - Has the altima which I like.
Honda - Accord Need I say more
Toyta - Nothing
VW - Passat
Madza - 6

So on my radar in a years time I will be looking at Altima, Accord, Fission, Passat, and Madza 6.

I can promise you I will look very hard at all those cars and see what I want to run with. Hell I might find something unexpect. When I got my sentra the Madza 3 was the car I almost got and it was never on my original list.

[quagmire]

GM - nothing that interested me. The Volt shows promise but I like a way to charge it as it stands but that might be different in a years time.



I am confused by that statement. As in you would want to plug it in to charge up the battery? If that is what you meant, you can plug it in to charge the battery up. But, if you go beyond the 40 mile range of the battery without plugging it in, the generator( it can be powered by a gas, diesel, or fuel cell engine) will turn on to keep the battery charged up. As with the Volt unlike typical hybrids like the Prius, Tahoe Hybrid, etc the engines only purpose is to turn a generator. In essence the Volt is an electric car with a built in generator to keep the batteries charged and the electric motor drives the wheels.

[Rodimus Prime]

I am confused by that statement. As in you would want to plug it in to charge up the battery? If that is what you meant, you can plug it in to charge the battery up. But, if you go beyond the 40 mile range of the battery without plugging it in, the generator( it can be powered by a gas, diesel, or fuel cell engine) will turn on to keep the battery charged up. As with the Volt unlike typical hybrids like the Prius, Tahoe Hybrid, etc the engines only purpose is to turn a generator. In essence the Volt is an electric car with a built in generator to keep the batteries charged and the electric motor drives the wheels.

sorry I had just gotten off a around 8 hours of travel and it was late.

The volt shows promise but as it stands I lack a way to charge it so it will not be an option for me for a little while.

[Lord Blackadder]

Saturn was always a part of GM. Geo was also GM though some( if not all) were rebadged Toyota's.

Actually, Geo was an assortment of rebadged cars. The Prizm was a Toyota Corolla, the Metro was a Suzuki Swift (the JDM name was Cultus, which wouldn't fly here), the Tracker was also a Suzuki and the Storm was an Isuzu.

The new Swift, not available here, is a sharp looking car with great fuel economy. Too bad it is not coming to the states.

[theBB]

The GM executives have and are making millions no matter how poor the company does.

Short sighted overpaid executives are killing this company.
I agree. The executives kept blaming the unions and the retiree costs for their troubles through the media for years. Still, they cannot come up with cars that are attractive enough, so that people would actually buy them. Consumers are willing to pay extra for good looking cars and overlook reliability problems. Look at VW. The quality of that brand has been at the bottom of the barrel for years, but I still see a lot of Golfs, Jettas and Passats around. Instead Pontiac comes up with G6. A boring looking sports car. Well, of course, it does not sell any...

It is quite obvious for quite some time that gas prices are increasing and fuel efficiency is becoming a greater concern for customers, but they are still unprepared. Both Ford and GM have European operations with fuel efficient small cars, but they are still years away from bringing such models over here. Cobalt was the lightest car among the ones Consumer Reports tested, but it still had the worst gas mileage. It also had the worst reliability record in its class a few years ago. I don't know if it is any better now. Ford is going to bring Ford Fiesta in 2010. I guess they want to go bankrupt before that year actually rolls over.

I think it is way past time some executives took the blame and retired without a huge settlement package. Instead, when LA Times calls the CEO on his failures, as the new models of the last few years has been designed entirely by the design teams brought in by him, GM pulls advertising from LA Times. No wonder media is quiet about the execution.

[Counterfit]

I am confused by that statement. As in you would want to plug it in to charge up the battery? If that is what you meant, you can plug it in to charge the battery up. But, if you go beyond the 40 mile range of the battery without plugging it in, the generator( it can be powered by a gas, diesel, or fuel cell engine) will turn on to keep the battery charged up. As with the Volt unlike typical hybrids like the Prius, Tahoe Hybrid, etc the engines only purpose is to turn a generator. In essence the Volt is an electric car with a built in generator to keep the batteries charged and the electric motor drives the wheels.

So it's like a diesel-electric locomotive, but with batteries and not necessarily diesel.

[iJohnHenry]

So it's like a diesel-electric locomotive, but with batteries and not necessarily diesel.

Coming soon, to a Westinghouse dealer near you.

Now with rubber tires!!!

http://faculty.simpson.edu/dick.tinder/www/twincities/indswitcher.JPEG

[Counterfit]

Coming soon, to a Westinghouse dealer near you.

Now with rubber tires!!!

http://faculty.simpson.edu/dick.tinder/www/twincities/indswitcher.JPEG

Pff, Westinghouse. Obviously that would only be sold through Neiman-Marcus. :rolleyes:

[crazytom]

A Ford Fiesta....I've heard that it's supposedly their 'World Car'. Pretty sharp for an econobox. It would make a great replacement for my Metro. I'd probably throw in an HHO generator to improve the fuel efficiency, too.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/images/front_picture_library_UK/dir_538/car_photo_269013_7.jpg

Link (http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/07/01/british-motor-show-preview-ford-fiesta-econetic-62mpg-98g-km/)

It's based on the Mazda 2 platform that's selling in Japan. Neither (Ford or Mazda) will make the North American market before 2010. :mad:

I'm also hoping for something like this:

http://www.flytheroad.com/images/Splash_8.jpg

More info on the V1. (http://www.flytheroad.com/)

[iGav]

A Ford Fiesta....I've heard that it's supposedly their 'World Car'.

Ford's first true World Car was the 1993 Ford Mondeo (CDW27 Platform).

Pretty sharp for an econobox.

And as it's a Ford, you can rest assured that it'll drive like a demon. Ford (Europe) are very, very good at that kind of thing. ;)

I can't be bothered looking up how the U.S. work out their fuel figures, but I was reading that the new Fiesta ECOnetic returns a 76mpg figure for the combined cycle (UK/Euro), and can breach the 80mpg mark too which is roughly the same as my Audi A2. :eek:

I'm still surprised that Ford U.S. haven't yet spun off their profitable European arm, if they're not careful...

[Lord Blackadder]

Ford's first true World Car was the 1993 Ford Mondeo (CDW27 Platform).

That was a good platform. The US-spec cars had some build quality issues (endemic to domestic manufacturers), but the little V6 was excellent. It was also pretty cheap. The 200hp SVT version was also a very good performer.

[drmario]

People always say "buy domestic", but just because a car has "Ford" or some other domestic car company's name stamped on it really doesn't make it a domestic car. The Ford Fusion is made in Mexico. On the other hand the Toyota Sienna was designed and built in the US. Which car is more American? Besides the fact that Honda's and Toyota's are more reliable. My dad has had a honda civic for 8 years. He hasn't had to take it in for anything other than routine maintenance.

[quagmire]

People always say "buy domestic", but just because a car has "Ford" or some other domestic car company's name stamped on it really doesn't make it a domestic car. The Ford Fusion is made in Mexico. On the other hand the Toyota Sienna was designed and built in the US. Which car is more American? Besides the fact that Honda's and Toyota's are more reliable. My dad has had a honda civic for 8 years. He hasn't had to take it in for anything other than routine maintenance.

I never had to take my GM vehicles in for anything other then TSB's and routine maintenance. Only the Equinox is built outside of the US( Canada). I don't really care where the final point of assembly is. If the parts are mostly US/Canadian sourced is what matters for me. You're still helping out the Japanese economy by buying Japanese products even if built here in the U.S.

[mojohanna]

All of the imports adjusted. Actually, I guess that's not quite accurate. They didn't bet the farm on gas guzzling SUVs remaining a trend like domestics did

This is simply incorrect. What did Toyota do with the Tundra? Nissan with the Titan. They tried to compete with American trucks and in my opinion failed.

Additionally, all of these "imported" brands typically are designing for different markets and then adapting those designs for the US market. That means that Trucks and big cars are not typically being designed for Asia and Europe.

It is also strange to see that no one is railing on BMW or Mercedes for producing gas guzzling cars. And god forbid something goes wrong with one of those cars. You end up paying the price of a Kia to get something fixed.

Friend of mine has a BMW X3, terrible gas milage and the sun roof broke. The cost of repair was $3,700. Now a GM car may break down, for example, my old Trailblazer had the transfer case go out (not making the car undriveable, just the FWD useless). It only cost $250 out of warranty to get it fixed. I drove that car for 80,000 miles and 5 years and that was the only thing besides regular maintenance that I had to put into it. I would say not bad at all.

The point here is that, in general, the big 3's cars are not hugely expensive to repair if something goes wrong.

[theBB]

This is simply incorrect. What did Toyota do with the Tundra? Nissan with the Titan. They tried to compete with American trucks and in my opinion failed.
Define failure... I see many Tundras around where I live.


The point here is that, in general, the big 3's cars are not hugely expensive to repair if something goes wrong.
Well, comparing the repair expense of a basic car brand with a "premium" one is not a fair comparison. Besides, the reliability of European manufacturers, such as VW or BMW, is quite low anyways. Based on surveys from Consumer Reports and JD Powers, it is hard to argue against the fact that Toyota and Honda have very good reliability. Yes, US brands are getting much better lately and the marquee ones such as Cadillac and Lincoln may go toe to toe with Lexus or Acura, but Chevy and Ford has some ways to go.

The final assembly, as well as a lot of sourcing is done from US based companies when Japanese brands move their plants to the US. Actually some magazines had comparisons of the content and some Japanese models sometimes had more US content than American nameplate ones. I understand that marketing of "big three" is trying to pull the heartstrings of consumers to sell their cars, as they are getting pretty desperate, but don't be fooled so easily.

[quagmire]

Define failure... I see many Tundras around where I live.

Tundra sell at ~150K units a year vs the 900K+ units the Silverado and F-150 do( well used to do as I am using pre-gas hike numbers). To be fair though to Toyota, they don't have the manufacturing capacity to get to Chevy's and Ford's numbers.

[ErikCLDR]

[QUOTE=theBB;5737012]
Well, comparing the repair expense of a basic car brand with a "premium" one is not a fair comparison. Besides, the reliability of European manufacturers, such as VW or BMW, is quite low anyways. Based on surveys from Consumer Reports and JD Powers, it is hard to argue against the fact that Toyota and Honda have very good reliability. Yes, US brands are getting much better lately and the marquee ones such as Cadillac and Lincoln may go toe to toe with Lexus or Acura, but Chevy and Ford has some ways to go.
/QUOTE]

I've never found American cars to be that unreliable. When they do break, parts are dirt cheap. Since basically all American cars are a rebranded something else and parts are always interchanged- the price of a part on a Ccadillac shouldn't be anymore than a part on a Chevy.

European cars I've found to be very unreliable, especially the Germans. Additionally, they cost 3x as much to fix as domestic car. The German cars we've owned include a 1996 or 1997 Audi A4, a 2004 BMW X3 3.0, and a 2005 Volkswagen Touareg. The Audi had lots of little issues- lights, locks, gas tank door, engine sensors, etc, etc, etc (not to mention very high repair costs). The BMW was a lemon so we got the Touareg. The Touareg is a nice car but has been one of the most reliable cars my family has ever owned- 2 CV joints in under 40,000 miles, trunk hatch broken 2x, goes through light bulbs like a baby does diapers, engine sensors, air suspension parts, the CD player broke, door seals falling off, drivers door lock, etc. Right now it has like 50,000 miles and it has to go back in because its making hard shifts and idles rough occasionally. :rolleyes:

[theBB]

I've never found American cars to be that unreliable. When they do break, parts are dirt cheap. Since basically all American cars are a rebranded something else and parts are always interchanged- the price of a part on a Cadillac shouldn't be anymore than a part on a Chevy.
If you work on your own car, maybe, but around where I live mechanics charge a lot more than the cost of the parts. Besides, I'd rather have a car that does not break down even if it is cheap to fix it when it does.

I agree with you on European brands. For some reason, people are a lot more forgiving about their VW's or Audi's. However, that is further proof for me that if GM had products that looked or felt exciting, consumers would overlook quality or price issues. Hence, my piling blame on the executives who oversaw the dull designs of these passenger cars. It is actually sad to see American cars from 50s, 60s and even 70s that had so much character and beauty reduced to this state of affairs.

[garybUK]

I don't know what planet your on but BMW/VW (Basically all the European Cars) are the most reliable and some of the best cars you can get.

Ford do their own thing (to great results) in Europe, most are built in Germany or Spain and are nothing like your American versions.

Ford own Mazda so don't get too cocky with those, maybe it's the fact that the Euro cars are built in the USA when destined for the US market and use sub-par parts compared to those over here?

I have a Vauxhall(Opel) GM Vectra 1.9CDTI (Diesel) on hire at the moment it's an awful car but good engine, so tacky and horrible, awaiting the delivery of my brand new shape A4 1.8TFSI :)

Dont forget Ford use PCT (Peugeot Citroen Group)'s Diesel Engines in their Diesels (TDCI)

Anyway it will always be europeans for me! Nissan make the ugliest cars available, Honda's are for old people and Toyotas are well..... ugh

[quagmire]

I don't know what planet your on but BMW/VW (Basically all the European Cars) are the most reliable and some of the best cars you can get.

Has to be the difference between the U.S models and European models. As with BMW, they are having some issues with the 335i's Twin Turbo engine as the high pressure fuel pump is failing prematurely. Mercedes in the US hit a major quality stump a couple years back, and VW was plagued with electrical problems. It's probably mostly all the electronic technology they stuff into their cars; it makes them so complex they tend to have problems.

[garybUK]

Has to be the difference between the U.S models and European models. As with BMW, they are having some issues with the 335i's Twin Turbo engine as the high pressure fuel pump is failing prematurely. Mercedes in the US hit a major quality stump a couple years back, and VW was plagued with electrical problems. It's probably mostly all the electronic technology they stuff into their cars; it makes them so complex they tend to have problems.

Never come across any of those problems, got the say the German cars have to be THE most reliable, seems isolated to the US, maybe the German plants have a better understanding of their own product and therefore the reliability is up?

[Counterfit]

http://www.flytheroad.com/images/Splash_8.jpg
Those wheels quite a bit like the 02-07 WRX wheels...
I don't know what planet your on but BMW/VW (Basically all the European Cars) are the most reliable and some of the best cars you can get.

And that's why they have the 4 year free maintenance program. :rolleyes:

[quagmire]

Never come across any of those problems, got the say the German cars have to be THE most reliable, seems isolated to the US, maybe the German plants have a better understanding of their own product and therefore the reliability is up?

BMW's for the US come from 3 plants I believe, the Spartansburg one in South Carolina( the Z4,X5, and X6), the German plant( 3 series though I don't know if the 5, 6, and 7 are built there as well), or the Austrian plant( X3).

[IJ Reilly]

According to Consumer Reports surveys, the most reliable car makers (in order) are:

Honda
Toyota
Subaru
BMW, Mazda, Nissan, Volkswagen (tie)

[ErikCLDR]

According to Consumer Reports surveys, the most reliable car makers (in order) are:

Honda
Toyota
Subaru
BMW, Mazda, Nissan, Volkswagen (tie)

I am really surprised at BMW and VW being up there. I'm not a fan of consumer reports at all usually because they pull things out of their butt. Honestly many people I know that have VW's sell them because of poor reliability and high repair costs. Two of my uncles and one of my aunts have had passats- 2003 V6 4Motion, 2001.5 1.8T, and 2005 TDI. The 2002 had oil sludge issues and something wrong with the coils as well as many little electrical glitches. The 2003 had lots of electrical issues as well. The TDI apparently was ok but had parts fall of the bottom of it and cause damage to the car. That same thing happened to my dads co worker that has a passat- he sold it and bought a Hyundai and likes it a lot more. Another one of my dads coworkers also has a Touareg, he's had a lot of trouble with it as well and it has some issues where it eats through tires every 10,000 miles. My friends mom had an 03 Passat Wagon 1.8t, they loved it but the reliabilty was not there. They said literally every time they took it in for one little thing it ended up being $1000.They ended up selling it and bought a Highlander. VW's are nice cars, the quality is there, they're fun to drive, but reliability... lacking.

This is kind of a dealer thing, but I absolutely hate the VW Dealer. We've bought cars from the Saab, Land Rover, Jeep, and Volvo dealers which are under the same auto group and have never had issues. The VW dealer has rude people, the bosses treat their employees like crap over there, and they never clean your car. In fact its usually dirtier and sometimes there's grease IN THE CAR. One time my mom literally marched back in and said "the next time I take this POS in you are going to give it a full detail" (there was grease on the headliner). The Jeep dealer (which is the same umbrella dealer) are more than helpful, they wash your car, and ever vacuum out the inside every time you take it in.

I can't say much about BMW other than ours was a lemon and I know a couple families with X5's that loved them until ~50,000 when continuous troubles broke out.

My dad owned a 1993, 1996, and 1999 Suburban. He put many miles on them and never had issues with them. We know the owner current owner of the 1996 and in its 12 years and 218,000 miles the only work it has had done was a leaking power steering line, air conditioning compressor (@ 190,000 miles mind you), a radiator, an alternator, a fuel pump and thats about it aside from normal consumables. My dad also drives my Grandmas 1998 Cutlass to work daily (he has a 150mile round trip commute). He's had it for just over 2 years and has put 65,000 miles on it in addition to the 40 that my grandma put on it. In that time the only work it has needed other than brakes was a new antenna, alternator, and the switch for the A/C (total maybe $700 max).

If you were to add up all the work done on our Touareg, had it not been done under warranty it would probably be $10,000. American cars are honestly much easier to deal with. They're not as complicated, you can fix them anywhere, and they're not difficult. Go into Wal-Mart and look for an oil filter for a Passat or Touareg. I can tell you they won't have them. Or windsheild wipers for a Land Rover newer than 1999... nope- if they say they do, they'll be the right size but won't be able to attach.

I love European cars but they all seem very unreliable over here. American cars suck but they are cheap to fix and don't seem to have the expensive issues the imports do. Between the two, I would still take a European car.

[IJ Reilly]

I am really surprised at BMW and VW being up there. I'm not a fan of consumer reports at all usually because they pull things out of their butt.

Their stats are based on surveys filled out by members.

[Rodimus Prime]

According to Consumer Reports surveys, the most reliable car makers (in order) are:

Honda
Toyota
Subaru
BMW, Mazda, Nissan, Volkswagen (tie)

well that explains the crap and worthless rating from consumer reports. I personelly think a better number is the number of warrenty repair items per 100 cars. Much better of a way to see problems. That or average cost in that area per 100 cars.

[garybUK]

I'm really shocked, BMW/Audi/VW are known for their reliability, i've seen a 15 year old Jetta still going with minimal repair or maintenance!!

We dn't have the extra warranty on the vehicles here, is it something to do with emissions? the EU being more stringent and our 'road-worthy' laws?

I sense people are more picky with them because their European? I do have to say though out of all the cars i would only ever buy European because of their reliability and style.

We do have Chevrolet over here now but they are re-branded from Daewoo absolutely horrible cheap cars (in the same league as Kia!!)

[Evangelion]

Sorry, I drive an F150 4X4

Sorry for off-topic, but.... Why? I mean, I heard that for a long time, the Ford F-series is the most popular car in USA. But it's a pickup! Why do you guys need pickups that bad? Sure, we have pickups in Finland as well, but people who drive them are people who REALLY need one. And that means that usually those pickups are sold to companies that do the kind of business that needs a pickup. Regular consumers never really buy any pickups. I think that overall, pickups have maybe 0.5% market-share. And it's no wonder. Compared to normal cars, they aren't as comfortable to drive, and they don't drive that well to begin with. For hauling cargo, you have station-wagons and vans, and for hauling people you have normal cars and MPVs.

So where do pickups fit in, as cars for normal consumers?

Besides, Top Gear agrees with me (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-W5-ZN0l9io) ;)

[xboxer75010]

My brother works for GM and he said that Chevy and Cadillac are selling at a record low this year. Obviously because of gas prices (Chevy Avalanche only gets 8MPG). I think that most US car manufacturers failed to see what high gas prices would do to their sales and to start planning ahead by developing more fuel efficient designs and to switch a lot of their plants over from SUV/Pickups to smaller cars.

We actually had a shortage here in Texas were dealerships were actually unable to buy enough small car inventory because manufacturers were not keeping up with demand. I also don't know how many countless threads I see on craigslist with people trying to trade their SUV/Pickup for Small 4 cylinder car.

PS: I drive 2 VW's. A 2001 1.8T Jetta - 75k on it and a 1990 VW Fox - 265k on it, both have been pretty reliable and I have not had any major issues with them.

[iJohnHenry]

That same thing happened to my dads co worker that has a passat- he sold it and bought a Hyundai and likes it a lot more.

I have an '07 KIA, and also love it.

Their stats are based on surveys filled out by members.

Yes, but they have certain criteria for their owner's surveys. Low-volume, or lately improved, vehicles seem to fall through the cracks. I.E. Hyundai and KIA.

[quagmire]

My brother works for GM and he said that Chevy and Cadillac are selling at a record low this year. Obviously because of gas prices (Chevy Avalanche only gets 8MPG). I think that most US car manufacturers failed to see what high gas prices would do to their sales and to start planning ahead by developing more fuel efficient designs and to switch a lot of their plants over from SUV/Pickups to smaller cars.

The Avalanche gets 12-14 MPG( depending if you get the 5.3 or 6 liter V8) city. If you get any less then that( especially at 8 MPG) you have to look at your brothers driving habits. Most likely he has a lead foot when it comes to driving that thing.

[IJ Reilly]

well that explains the crap and worthless rating from consumer reports. I personelly think a better number is the number of warrenty repair items per 100 cars. Much better of a way to see problems. That or average cost in that area per 100 cars.

I don't see where this is true, especially since warranties end but problems do not. My only beef with the way Consumer Reports aggregates their data is that they don't break down reliability by major options, such as engines. Often, one optional variation on a car can account for most of the reliability issues, but CU doesn't publish that data.

Yes, but they have certain criteria for their owner's surveys. Low-volume, or lately improved, vehicles seem to fall through the cracks. I.E. Hyundai and KIA.

Right. If they don't have a sufficient statistical basis for reporting, then they don't report. This is the way it should be done.

[Counterfit]

I'm really shocked, BMW/Audi/VW are known for their reliability, i've seen a 15 year old Jetta still going with minimal repair or maintenance!!

It's not the 15 year-old VWs right now, it's the 6-12 year old ones.

[yg17]

This is kind of a dealer thing, but I absolutely hate the VW Dealer. We've bought cars from the Saab, Land Rover, Jeep, and Volvo dealers which are under the same auto group and have never had issues. The VW dealer has rude people, the bosses treat their employees like crap over there, and they never clean your car. In fact its usually dirtier and sometimes there's grease IN THE CAR. One time my mom literally marched back in and said "the next time I take this POS in you are going to give it a full detail" (there was grease on the headliner). The Jeep dealer (which is the same umbrella dealer) are more than helpful, they wash your car, and ever vacuum out the inside every time you take it in.

That's independent of VW and shouldn't be used as a reason to avoid VW. I've had nothing but excellent service at my VW dealer. They're prompt, friendly, and my car always comes back shiny and clean.

[quagmire]

That's independent of VW and shouldn't be used as a reason to avoid VW. I've had nothing but excellent service at my VW dealer. They're prompt, friendly, and my car always comes back shiny and clean.

That is a shame. People will right off a brand because of a shoddy dealer. Many people swear off the Big 3 due to the shoddy dealers.

[yg17]

That is a shame. People will right off a brand because of a shoddy dealer. Many people swear off the Big 3 due to the shoddy dealers.


I agree. The only time it's OK to write off a brand like that is if all dealers in the area are shoddy. If that VW dealer is the only one in Erik's town, then yeah, I could see not buying a VW. But in my area, I've got several VW dealers to choose from (and there's only one that I wouldn't go to, they make other crooked dealers look fully legit) so I definitely can't write off the brand.

[coupdetat]

Really, is anyone surprised? I went to a restaurant last week that was next to a Chevy dealership--the ENTIRE LOT was filled with Silverados and Suburbans!! GM's had a few hits that they like to parade around but it needs consistency and a long-term vision. The Malibu is nice looking but is still losing lots of comparison tests against the Altima, Accord, Camry, Sonata, etc. The Lambdas still guzzle gas. The CTS and Corvette are niche cars. The Impala is horribly outdated, and the Cobalt is just plain horrible. The Aveo... I don't know where to begin.

Also, this "change names every 5 years so people won't remember it sucked" crap needs to stop, along with the insane badge engineering (4 Lambda CUV's?).

Everyone with a bit of common sense should have seen this coming years ago, but GM's executives were too myopic to recognize the coming shift. The way I see it, if you love American industry, DON'T buy garbage. Demand excellence from our country. Using your wallet, tell GM they need to do a better job.

[ErikCLDR]

I agree. The only time it's OK to write off a brand like that is if all dealers in the area are shoddy. If that VW dealer is the only one in Erik's town, then yeah, I could see not buying a VW. But in my area, I've got several VW dealers to choose from (and there's only one that I wouldn't go to, they make other crooked dealers look fully legit) so I definitely can't write off the brand.

It's the reliability experience of VW that will never let my family buy another one. The dealer situation is just another smack in the face. I just don't understand why such a good dealer chain has one of their dealers be so inconsiderate, especially being such a "fun" brand. Personally I consider VW a more premium brand than Jeep/Dodge/Chrysler, so why does the jeep dealer have such better service?

And to who ever said that Consumer Reports said that VW was towards the top of the list, I believe you, but it contradicts this other statement they made in April 2008.

Other news from our latest survey:

* Despite Toyota's problems, the automaker still ranks third overall in reliability, behind only Honda and Subaru, with 11 models in the best list. Honda has six with a smaller model lineup.

* Only three domestic models made the Most reliable list: the Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, and the two-wheel-drive Ford F-150 with the V6 engine. U.S. makes, however, account for almost half the models—25 of 44—on the Least reliable list. There are 13 from GM, 6 from Chrysler, and 1 from Ford.

* European makes account for 17 models on the Least reliable list. This includes six each from Mercedes-Benz and Volkswagen/Audi.
Source: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/used-cars/reliability/best-worst-in-car-reliability-1005/overview/index.htm

In that VW's and Audi are very very similar, I would assume they would rank closely on the reliability ratings.

[2ms]

No thanks, their cars are pieces of junk, and if supporting an American worker was my main concern when buying a car (which it isn't, I don't care if you hate me for that) then I'd buy a Honda built in Ohio, a Toyota built in Kentucky, a Hyundai built in Alabama, a Subaru built in Indiana or a Nissan built in Mississippi.

Sorry, but the big three made their troubles when they decided to build gas guzzling SUVs in times of ever increasing fuel prices. And while I feel sorry for the workers, I'm not going to bail them out by spending thousands of dollars on a sub-par vehicle.

Sorry, but you've got the gas guzzling SUVs thing backwards. The big three have been making SUVs since the beginning. The Model T was a big-wheeled off-roader/SUV -- even the roads in the big cities weren't paved in the early 1900s.

This is the country of long roads, mostly rural landscape, constant development/new building, and tremendous need for work trucks. The top selling vehicles in this country have been pickups since the beginning.

The dumbasses in building gas-guzzling SUVs are the Japanese big 3. What's the largest standard pickup you can buy? The Toyota Tundra. What's the largest primary full-size SUV in company line-up? The Toyota Sequoia. What's the largest luxury SUV? The Infinity Q56. What's the second largest primary full-size SUV in corporate lineup that is larger than all three of the Ford Expedition, Chevrolet Tahoe, and Dodge Durango? The Nissan Armada. And who has more SUV platforms in their lineup than any other car company in the world -- Toyota.

Even the Japanese Big one that has ventured the least from its motorcycle company roots by continuing the longest in selling cars with enlarged motorcycle engines in them (tiny displacement I4s across the board every model), makes a 17 mpg SUV and full-size pickup (Honda).

American car companies build SUVs because the American people have demanded SUVs for 100 years. The Japanese Big 3, for example, despite coming from countries of extreme density of population into urban areas, gas costing more than twice as much as here, and more people riding motorcycles than cars, decided to invest in entirely new platforms, factories, etc in order to build gas-guzzling SUVs. And they're the ones who are eating it the worst by far now that gas prices have gone up to still only half of what the rest of the world pays.

[2ms]

Really, is anyone surprised? I went to a restaurant last week that was next to a Chevy dealership--the ENTIRE LOT was filled with Silverados and Suburbans!! GM's had a few hits that they like to parade around but it needs consistency and a long-term vision. The Malibu is nice looking but is still losing lots of comparison tests against the Altima, Accord, Camry, Sonata, etc. The Lambdas still guzzle gas. The CTS and Corvette are niche cars. The Impala is horribly outdated, and the Cobalt is just plain horrible. The Aveo... I don't know where to begin.

Also, this "change names every 5 years so people won't remember it sucked" crap needs to stop, along with the insane badge engineering (4 Lambda CUV's?).

Everyone with a bit of common sense should have seen this coming years ago, but GM's executives were too myopic to recognize the coming shift. The way I see it, if you love American industry, DON'T buy garbage. Demand excellence from our country. Using your wallet, tell GM they need to do a better job.

Can I get some of that **** you're smoking? It seems to be very effective at getting one f'd up. The Malibu wins lots of comparison tests, not loses. It was even named one of the 10 best vehicles sold in the US this year by C&D. Likewise the CTS. Likewise the Corvette. How many of the other 4 manufacturers of the 4 cars you mention had as many cars in C&D's 10 Best (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_and_Driver_Ten_Best) this year? Oops. None. In fact, none of them had any cars at all on the 10 Best list at all except one :rolleyes:

[iJohnHenry]

The Malibu wins lots of comparison tests, not loses. It was even named one of the 10 best vehicles sold in the US this year by C&D. Likewise the CTS.

So, will we see GM roll-out a 5-year, 100,000 km warranty this year??

[2ms]

So, will we see GM roll-out a 5-year, 100,000 km warranty this year??

I don't understand what you are getting at. I doubt you think I'm a fortune teller, so I think your question isn't intended to be taken literally but rather as some other kind of statement. Are you saying that GM's competition has this kind of warranty or what? Anyway though, I'm really no more than a person who reads car magazines enough to be able to correct someone when wrong about what's in the car magazines.

[iJohnHenry]

My point, to belabour same, is let them put their money where their mouth is,

[quagmire]

My point, to belabour same, is let them put their money where their mouth is,

they do have a 5 year/100,000 mile powertrain warranty. Though you want bumper to bumper right?

[iJohnHenry]

they do have a 5 year/100,000 mile powertrain warranty. Though you want bumper to bumper right?

Yes.

I have that, with road-side assist. Not this On-Star crap that requires a subscription after the first year.

I cancelled my CAA/AAA, and saved 5 years of premiums there too.

[quagmire]

Yes.

I have that, with road-side assist. Not this On-Star crap that requires a subscription after the first year.

I cancelled my CAA/AAA, and saved 5 years of premiums there too.

Road side assist won't call the paramedics for you if you're unconscious after an accident or diagnose a problem for you on the spot. ;) Onstar has been useful for me. So for me it is worth it. Your experience/opinion may differ.

[ryannel2003]

GM is building better cars now than they were 10 years ago. Unfortunately, so many people have been bitten in the ass that the thought of an American car never comes to mind. It's quite unfortunate.

[joeshell383]

...

[crap freakboy]

It's simple- American cars are big, thirsty, under engineered and ugly (sounds like the wife describing me actually, but I digress), just watch any Top Gear review and it usually ends with '...why buy this when you can buy one of these instead?'
I do feel for the families that will suffer but the times they are achanging.:rolleyes:

[quagmire]

It's simple- American cars are big, thirsty, under engineered and ugly (sounds like the wife describing me actually, but I digress), just watch any Top Gear review and it usually ends with '...why buy this when you can buy one of these instead?'
I do feel for the families that will suffer but the times they are achanging.:rolleyes:

Top Gear is for entertainment. Their US bashing is what makes the show so entertaining. :D It is evident that they have an anti- US bias when they test drove the GT500 and put it on the dyno. Hammond came off as not understanding that the car loses HP when it goes through the powertrain to the wheels. Again, when they test drove the regular C6 when Hammond put a pebble on the road and went over it and said it hurt his back. But, again it is from an entertainment stand point they did it. From the American cars they test drove, they loved the CTS( and CTS-V, though Clarkson hated the bonging) and the Z06.

[crap freakboy]

Top Gear is for entertainment. Their US bashing is what makes the show so entertaining. :D It is evident that they have an anti- US bias when they test drove the GT500 and put it on the dyno. Hammond came off as not understanding that the car loses HP when it goes through the powertrain to the wheels. Again, when they test drove the regular C6 when Hammond put a pebble on the road and went over it and said it hurt his back. But, again it is from an entertainment stand point they did it. From the American cars they test drove, they loved the CTS( and CTS-V, though Clarkson hated the bonging) and the Z06.

True, but unfortunately they and other 'enterjournalists' are the norm now and have the mic.

[ErikCLDR]

Top gear is very enjoyable to watch, but very biased.

British cars are always the best. German cars are despised. American cars they make out to be crap but they actually did like the CTS, Z06, Ford GT500, and Focus.

American cars are finally starting to boost up their build quality, but its kind of too late, now that car sales are dwindling.

I wouldn't call American cars "under engineered". They're built so that they can be easily worked on. Unfortunately they're also built to be as cost effective as possible- save $1 here and sell a million cars, save $1m dollars. Its the German cars that are over engineered. Is it necessary to have to remove the air intake to change a light bulb? Or take apart 1/2 the car to change the oil? Or remove loads of plastic covers to do anything.

[2ms]

It's simple- American cars are big, thirsty, under engineered and ugly (sounds like the wife describing me actually, but I digress), just watch any Top Gear review and it usually ends with '...why buy this when you can buy one of these instead?'
I do feel for the families that will suffer but the times they are achanging.:rolleyes:

Hah, yeah Top Gear, a comedy and entertainment show more than a serious car review show, is The Bottom Line.

Have you ever heard of the Car & Driver 10-best list? It's the Newsweek College Ratings of cars. GM has more cars on there than any other manufacturer in world. The Japanese Big 3 compete the most directly with American car companies since they are most parallel in price and size categories of vehicles. Only one of the Japanese Big 3 has any cars on the list at all. Toyota has more SUV platforms than any of the American Big 3 do. Toyota and Nissan's full-size SUVs and pickups get worse mileage than any of their Big 3 analogs.

Get your car info from somewhere other than an entertainent show in country in which 95% of American vehicles aren't even offered. Or at least, if you're going to go around spewing giant generalizations being applied to every car company in an entire country, check your facts.

[godmachine12]

Sorry for off-topic, but.... Why? I mean, I heard that for a long time, the Ford F-series is the most popular car in USA. But it's a pickup! Why do you guys need pickups that bad? Sure, we have pickups in Finland as well, but people who drive them are people who REALLY need one. And that means that usually those pickups are sold to companies that do the kind of business that needs a pickup. Regular consumers never really buy any pickups. I think that overall, pickups have maybe 0.5% market-share. And it's no wonder. Compared to normal cars, they aren't as comfortable to drive, and they don't drive that well to begin with. For hauling cargo, you have station-wagons and vans, and for hauling people you have normal cars and MPVs.

So where do pickups fit in, as cars for normal consumers?
[/URL] ;)

Thankfully, it's reign is over. The Civic has taken it's spot, but trucks are still everywhere. I know people who drive trucks, huge trucks for that matter, that never use them for anything but recreational driving. It's the most foolish thing I can imagine. I'm American and I damn sure can't explain it to you. My best guess is that we have yet to experience truly expensive gasoline. We are going nuts over $4/gallon gas ($1.05/liter), which doesn't even compare to prices in say Finland. How much is gas there now? When I was there last summer it was over 3 Euro/liter and I'm sure it's worse now. Of course our dwindling dollar makes it look worse, but the point is the same.

It took awhile, but I finally convined my brother, mother, and stepfather to switch to more fuel efficient vehicles. Two drove trucks, and didn't use them for anything except normal driving, and my mother drove an AWD Subaru. We live in TN for crying out loud! We maybe get 5 days of real snow a year, so weather is no excuse. Now with two Corolla's and an Accord, they are much, much happier and do all the same things as before. I have a manual Civic and pull 36-37 city and 42 highway. I wouldn't think of driving anything else. If only we could convince everyone else of the same.

[idyll]

So sad.. I hope we see more of GM's European flavors "imported" to the US