Idea were never a problem with the big three....just product

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Btw, that blog also mentions that GM will apparently trim itself to 4 brands: Buick, Chevrolet, Cadillac and GMC.

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/01/12/o...o-four-models/

Say goodbye to Pontiac, Saturn, Saab and Hummer? I'm sure they could sell Saab and possibly Hummer (as much as I think they are for the over-compensating type, I'm sure there's still a market for them for someone), I don't really see Saturn and Pontiac surviving if true.

Pontiac isn't being wiped out... instead, it will be a "specialty" arm of GM... think Solstice more than G5.

As for Saturn, since that is Opel North America (and producing some of their better and more successful models), I doubt they'll make it disappear outright. The two things I've heard is keeping it separate, and selling a chunk of it, while keeping a controlling share. The other is to merge it with Chevrolet, and merge the best units into the Chevy line. Saab can likely be sold. Hummer I think will fold, or slide into the GMC line as a specialty item.

The big trouble that the Big 3 got into was listening to the masses, rather than good planning. People in the 90s clammored for cheap cars. So they built cheap cars. They sold like crazy, but they were junk. GM is probably the best example:

New Cavaliers in the 90s could be had for as little as 10k. Sunfires were the "high end version" and could be had for $13k+. Problem is, when cars are cheap in price, they are usually cheap in quality. There's a reason Civics and Corollas start in the low to mid 20k range. Despite the fact that from about 2001 onwards, GM started building better vehicles again (and the prices rose to match). For example, Cavaliers were being offered in the 15k+ range, and Sunfires began to cost $18k+. However, the damage to their reputation was staggering. People didn't care that these were now better made and with fewer issues, perception was they had to be just as lousy as everything built in the 90s, just pricier now. They tried renaming the cars to illustrate that change had been made, but even that hasn't helped as much as they'd hope. Ironically, they are still #1 in sales by a good margin.

[Ozy_Flame]

I think calling the Big Three producing "crap" vehicles is a bit of a misnomer.

Don't drive like an idiot and bag your car into the ground. Learn how to take care of your car, maintain it and maximize it's longevity rate. I bet there's a whole ton of people out there who complain that they make a crappy product but don't bother to even change the oil or get the required flushes.

Although I drive a Mazda, every North American car I've driven or had in the household has been absolutely fine. Drive properly and there's nary any big problems.

[habernac]

normal maintenance and proper driving habits were part of the game plan with my lemon Big 3 car. My wife's as well.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I think calling the Big Three producing "crap" vehicles is a bit of a misnomer.

Don't drive like an idiot and bag your car into the ground. Learn how to take care of your car, maintain it and maximize it's longevity rate. I bet there's a whole ton of people out there who complain that they make a crappy product but don't bother to even change the oil or get the required flushes.

Although I drive a Mazda, every North American car I've driven or had in the household has been absolutely fine. Drive properly and there's nary any big problems.

Luxury cars like Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Lexus, etc, are widely considered to be high-performance cars with significant quality and longevity. However, the maintenance required and frequency of repair in these cars would shock people since everything is premium, special edition or high performance, yet surprisingly error prone and low quality.

My buddy spent more money on maintenance and repair issues in his relatively new BMW M3, than I have in my 02 Sunfire, and my previous car, an 88 T-Bird at least twice over.

[browna]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Agreed. Looking at GM, do we really need a Cavalier and a Sunfire? While I'm sure a number of costs are shared, it still has to be more expensive to roll out a different body for each mechanically similar model.

A big part of this reason is the unions. x number of shift and x number of workers at x $ an hour have to produce x number of the particular cars in their wage scale, at a certain plant. All those cars can't be branded Chevrolet, or Pontaic.

The big 3 all have great ideas...but becoming so bloated, somewhat due to mismanagement, and also due to the union demands taking up a lot more resources then other manufacturers, those ideas can't be acted on either quick enough to hit the market in time. Also, the restrictions of suppliers to be able to make enough of each of parts or enough availablity of parts on short order. This is needed to be able to prodcue enough units in order to to justify rejigging a plant or two, and add on top of that all the union issues surrounding those changes, to be able to move quick enough to implement the ideas.

As for quality, GM's Oshawa plant has won numerous times the top quality plant of the year, and to be honest, the last 2 or 3 years, the reputation from the 90's is still somewhat unfairly hung around the neck of GM.
Gm and big 3 Trucks are the top of the line quality wise, and yes, no matter the economy trucks will sell. Toyota tried to enter the full size market and have had nothing but major recall problems.

I've pretty much owned GM vehicles my whole life, and excellent reliability, and when things did go wrong, there are both enough dealers and cheap enough parts, to fix. In contrast, the 5 year old Acura MDX we had for 2 years and recently sold, I sunk $8000 into. Those costs are easliy 30-40% higher then a comparble GM bill, mainly because there are no "rebuilt" parts such as alternators, everything is OEM. This, opposed to something like that happening in the past on a GM car, I could easily get something rebuilt.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Luxury cars like Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Lexus, etc, are widely considered to be high-performance cars with significant quality and longevity. However, the maintenance required and frequency of repair in these cars would shock people since everything is premium, special edition or high performance, yet surprisingly error prone and low quality.

I can see Mercedes, BMW and Audi's being a problem. they are never in the top 10 of car makers for least amount of problems. I would never want to own one.

Lexus however is #1 again for the least amount of problems. Followed by Honda, Acura and Toyota. Funny that Honda cars have less problems then their Acura lineup.

[hixxes]

Originally Posted by browna

I've pretty much owned GM vehicles my whole life, and excellent reliability, and when things did go wrong, there are both enough dealers and cheap enough parts, to fix. In contrast, the 5 year old Acura MDX we had for 2 years and recently sold, I sunk $8000 into. Those costs are easliy 30-40% higher then a comparble GM bill, mainly because there are no "rebuilt" parts such as alternators, everything is OEM. This, opposed to something like that happening in the past on a GM car, I could easily get something rebuilt.

I've only owned GM trucks and SUV's and I've never had any real issues with any of them. Even my old 1980 4X4 was solid and extremely reliable. I recently bought a Silverado and fully expect it to be a gem for years to come. I'll probably never buy anything but GM products.

[REDVAN]

Is this enough for Chrysler to compete with Acura?

I happen to like "domestics" and think that for the price, you get a better car. As in, usually you can get the same (or roughly equivilent performance) car, for cheaper price. Yes, it won't last for 20 years, but when people buy a car, they don't want it to last for 20 years.

If you want one car for the next 20 years, get a 50k Toyota and be done with it. If you want something to last 10 years, buy a 30k domestic. Same thing, give or take.

[The Fonz]

What happens to my warranty if I buy a Pontiac G6, and then GM stops making Pontiac?

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

What happens to my warranty if I buy a Pontiac G6, and then GM stops making Pontiac?

They will still honor it I'm sure. However if GM goes under you are toast.

[habernac]

I'm sure GM will honour the warranty as long as it's valid.

[Phanuthier]

I think alot of people are confused about the use of the term "reliability" - it isn't determined by the one or two experiences you might have (i.e. "I've had two Fords and they've been fine") we're talking about the reliability of a sample of tens of thousands and hundread of thousands of vehicles. Quite frankly, reliability statistics are rarely ever given out comprehensively, although I think counting the number of recalls is a close metric that can be used to evaluate the quality of a cars engineering.

When it comes to the big 3 surviving, its about talking about its business practices and how they have a bad business model. They've been burning through cash for years, while its overseas competitors (for the most part) have been operating on positive margins. Thats what it comes down to for me.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Btw, that blog also mentions that GM will apparently trim itself to 4 brands: Buick, Chevrolet, Cadillac and GMC.

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/01/12/o...o-four-models/

Say goodbye to Pontiac, Saturn, Saab and Hummer? I'm sure they could sell Saab and possibly Hummer (as much as I think they are for the over-compensating type, I'm sure there's still a market for them for someone), I don't really see Saturn and Pontiac surviving if true.

GM doesn't actually own Hummer. The name "Hummer" is licensed from AM General (the manufaturers of the Original Humvee).

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Xbox is a product and Microsoft is the company... isn't it hard to be sponsored by just a product?

I was just being a ######. You never, maybe not never but rarely, hear it called Microsoft Xbox, it is just Xbox.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

I can see Mercedes, BMW and Audi's being a problem. they are never in the top 10 of car makers for least amount of problems. I would never want to own one.

Lexus however is #1 again for the least amount of problems. Followed by Honda, Acura and Toyota. Funny that Honda cars have less problems then their Acura lineup.

Personally, I think reliability ratings are about as accurate as farmer's almanacs. They show a general trend, but every automaker produces lemons. Lexus has a good general trend for sure... but with Japanese cars, even today, when it rains, it pours. I think someone mentioned 30-40% more expense than a domestic, and that sounds about right. Plus, with a Lexus, you're really paying double for a fully-loaded Toyota with an L, ditto with Acura and Infiniti.

[habernac]

Maybe I've just been lucky. Dad bought an Infiniti QX-4 that wasn't the greatest vehicle for the money, but still had only minor issues really. I still won't go near the domestics.

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

I was just being a ######. You never, maybe not never but rarely, hear it called Microsoft Xbox, it is just Xbox.

Ya, I figured as much, but for some reason my edit didn't make it though, I put some smilies in there. Hmmmmmm

[csnarpy]

I always swore i would never buy anything from the big 3, but with an addition to the family, we have begun looking at SUV`s, hybrids. After much research it looks I will be breaking the mold and going to the Escape. Best rating for mileage, eco, reliability and price.

So, at least Ford has done something to improve themselves. I hope the others take note. One thing, once Ford bought 25% of Mazda, they turned themselves around. It`s great to learn from others, isn`t it...

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by REDVAN

I happen to like "domestics" and think that for the price, you get a better car. As in, usually you can get the same (or roughly equivilent performance) car, for cheaper price. Yes, it won't last for 20 years, but when people buy a car, they don't want it to last for 20 years.

If you want one car for the next 20 years, get a 50k Toyota and be done with it. If you want something to last 10 years, buy a 30k domestic. Same thing, give or take.

Talk about low expectations! You must be their perfect customer.

I want my car to last 20+ years, even if I won't keep it that long. The longer it's built for, the further down the line problems will start.

[REDVAN]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Talk about low expectations! You must be their perfect customer.

I want my car to last 20+ years, even if I won't keep it that long. The longer it's built for, the further down the line problems will start.

I like my car to last as long as I need it for.

I also figure I won't want to keep a car for more than 10 years. But who knows. My parents keep domestics for 15-20 years sans any problems.