Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
GM and Chrysler are exploring a merger according to news reports. Maybe they should include Ford in the mix. None of the three of them are worth a damn...
Fueled by cheap oil (word play)..they built big SUV's and gas guzzlers for the US.
They should have diversified and retooled their manufacturing like Toyota and Honda did.
The dinosaurs didn't live forever you know.
Toyota has its problems. It has many big gas guzzlers in its SUV lineup too. It's pickup trucks have been going in the wrong direction in terms of size and fuel economy for well over 10 years. The old Toyota pickup was a leader in terms of fuel economy in the 80s. Ford and GM have provided better fuel economy since the 90s. The new Tundra is a behemoth fuel consumer that replaced a more economical T100.
The Sequoia and 4Runner are big gas guzzlers too.
Ford, GM and Chrysler have introduced far more innovative products over the past 5 years compared to Honda or Toyota. Quality differences are marginally better for Honda and Toyota compared to certain American lines.
Keep perpetuating the myth. I'm sure you'll all be quite happy when were choosing which Chinese-made car to choose from in 10 or 20 years as the majority of Americans work for Walmart wages only to export their dollars to the new world super powers with cash in their coffers, China and India.
this is what i like to see. Ariel Motor Company this is a great example of entrepreneurial spirit. the above has a total staff of 5 if i'm not mistaken. result= fastest accelerating production vehicle, one of the best handling, most fun to drive, cars around. in the sports car class it's also probably the most fuel efficient and consumes the least amount of resources in its manufacture. it also happens to be one of the cheapest. if tptb allowed gm, ford, etc to fail this is the kinda stuff which will arise from the ashes.
She's a little old lady who had the car serviced at the same dealership in her little old town ever since she bought the new truck. She had every receipt for each service required by her "little book" (the maintenance suggestion manual) going back to the initial purchase date. Nah....
My mom wouldn't even know how to unlock the radiator cap...nor would she try to figure it out. That's what mechanics are for.
If it did have the wrong fluid mixed in, then it wouldn't been a "GM Certified" mechanic that did it. So..hey...still their fault.
Every mass manufacturer has it's problems and every car brand has vehicles that are not quite right or that are lemons right from the gate. I had a '05 ford F250 lariate powerstroke that pumped exhaust gas into the cab, had the digital heat controls shut completely down if the outside temp got below -10 deg and never,ever got better than 16 mpg and ford pretty much said "too bad for you" so I dumped the truck as fast as I could.
So does that mean I'll never buy a ford again? No, it does mean I'll never go to THAT dealer again.
I bought a brand new chevy blazer in '89 and after 200 miles had the worst shake/shudder at around 20 mph. Turns out the torque converter had turned black and ballooned and was about to explode. I had to go to 2 different dealers to get this diagnosed and fixed because the first dealer said the shudder was "normal". Do I never by a GM product again? No, I just don't bother with that first dealer ever again.
We currently have a '97 tahoe that has 140k miles on it and my wife wouldn't get rid of it for anything (well almost). It's been a wonderful vehicle and has only had minor things go wrong since we got it years ago.
Now if you look at all the dealership service depts you'll notice that there's cars in them because things go wrong with mechanical items and it's how the local DEALER handles things that will either turn people off or make them return.
I think american car makers did build crap for a few years but I think that's turned around now and they have to fight to get past the perception that foriegn=good since perception is everything even if it's not true. Just look at Hyundi. Real decent cars built on the cheap but you can't get squat for them on a resale, almost considered disposable cars.
Every mass manufacturer has it's problems and every car brand has vehicles that are not quite right or that are lemons right from the gate. I had a '05 ford F250 lariate powerstroke that pumped exhaust gas into the cab, had the digital heat controls shut completely down if the outside temp got below -10 deg and never,ever got better than 16 mpg and ford pretty much said "too bad for you" so I dumped the truck as fast as I could.
So does that mean I'll never buy a ford again? No, it does mean I'll never go to THAT dealer again.
Exactly. In '94 we bought an S10 pickup. It had every issue you could imagine. They even installed the incorrect engine mounts at the factory. Every 20th (est) time you cranked the engine it the fan would hit the shroud...untimately it would shatter the shroud. Additionally there were tons of other problems that were warrantee department induced. Had to have every wheel replaced because they accidentally messed them up in the wheel balancer (would have thought they would have learned after the first wheel but they proceeded to mess up the other three). Front tires kept wearing out pre-maturely because they refused to set the alignment correctly even after we complained and had an alignment expert tell them how to do it properly. These 'mechanics' couldn't find their a$$es with both hands and a flashlight. Once my dad dropped it off to be worked on and laid a coke can under the back tire. They called to tell him to pick it up and when he got there the can was still there under the tire. They never moved it. If they had it would have crushed the can. They just got tired of working on it...
Result: We do not shop at that dealership any longer. It was perfectly clear they did not have the desire nor the ability to service their vehicles correctly. Prior and following that we had no problems with any GM vehicle (that wasn't our own fault).
You would think after so many years of building cars they would have learned how to build a good, reliable, and economical vehicle. Guess not. Looks like they are heading toward bankruptcy. Any thoughts? What happens to all those pensions that won't be insured because there isn't going to be enough money?
Lisa
It is a popularly held belief that Detroit builds crappy cars. That USED to be the case in the late 70's and throughout the 80's. In the 90's, the Big Three really invested in turning their QC around. And they did it. The JD Powers satisfaction surveys show this. We have a Ford F-350 and have used it the way pickups are supposed to be used - as a farm truck. Works great, we've been entirely pleased with the performance and total cost of ownership. The most recent F-series diesels... well, they've had problems stemming back to forced engine changes thanks to the weasels down at the EPA.
The reason why the Big Three still have perceived QC problems is because they have the same crappy dealers they've had for 50 years, who insult and mistreat the consumer, as opposed to how the Japanese dealership treat customers (with a smile and "let me make it good" attitude). That, and the Big Three never acknowledged their issues or apologized for them. They should have had an ad campaign that said "We let you down. We're sorry. We're fixing the QC problems, and if you own one of our cars made in years X through Y, bring it in and we've got a trade-in deal for you..."
Nope. They just thought that they could get away with not admitting that they screwed their most loyal customers. Then they start losing money on every car with their 0% financing - oh, and they plump up their earnings with their financing company, hiding losses on the car side with outsized gains on the finance company side. Feh.
Now, the finance company (GMAC) is dead as any finance company is in this environment. GM wants to sell the rest of GMAC to Cerberus and in return get the manufacturing assets of Chrysler from Cerberus. Cerberus might go for it, they might not. Cerberus ain't filled with stupid people, but buying 51% of GMAC will go down in that hedge fund's history as one of their less suave moves.
On the whole, GM's issue is no longer actual quality, it is perceived quality - and that goes directly to the dealer. It is their dealer network (too many dealers, and too many of them are idiots), that **** off the customer when there's a small problem. It is the dealer and their 50 years of screwing the customer attitude in sales that makes buying a car a unpleasurable experience for most people. Look at the Saturn sales model - it works. Look at the Honda sales model. Don't see too many people shying away from Honda, do we?
The other systemic problems for GM is their employees (far too highly paid, and far too much health care and pension burden) and their management (who are constantly giving into labor). Absent firing the whole flippin' lot of them and hiring all new people, GM is doomed.
In other words, with the people in place now, GM's problems would not be solved if you gave them Toyota's cars to sell. I'm driving home the point that it isn't the cars. It is the people. They're just paid too much for too little productivity, management is far too unresponsive to market changes, the board is just stuck in time in the 80's... from the CEO to the janitor, the people are the problem.
They also engaged in shady sales practices, offering 60 and 72 month loans which caused the sheeple to become upside-down on the loan as the car was of little or no value which encouraged the sheeple to trade in their cars for new ones every 2 to 3 years.
Nobody puts a gun to your head and forces you to have a loan for that duration. You can make it as short as you want. If you are shooting for a low payment and know for a fact that you will still be driving that same car after the duration of the loan...then there's no problem. The problem is people want a new car every three years....so why would they be so bold as to take a 6 year loan when they already know how long they plan on driving it?
That's not what's upsetting IMO. In 1990 my family bought a truck for $10500. 5 years later the same basic truck with similar options is $6000 more....5 years after that....it's $5000 more. I mean WTF? They priced themselves into this mess. They've taken a vehicle made no major improvements and expect to double the price in a 10 yr span and still expect people to be happy about it. Ah but they've kept the big wheel turning by enabling people to keep their payments at the same level but allowing them longer to pay it off. So there it is.
I'll tell you what it's forced me to do. It's basically backed me -average joe- into a corner so I cannot afford to buy a new vehicle every 3-4 years. Instead I let some other schmo take the hit on the new car (which he will then trade in after only a year...wth is that about???) and I swoop in and buy it at a huge discount. Nothing wrong with it at all. In fact it's like brand new in a lot of cases and has less than 10k miles....it just costs 35% less.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
GM's problems are not their cars
