Will General Motors declare bankruptcy?

[Swift]

They will be releasing E55 trucks as well from what I have heard. Also in 2007 GM will be releasing both the Tahoe and the Yukon as full hybrid models. Not to mention the hybrid Saturn VUE Greenline which will be out May of 2007.

Yeah, they finally figured out that hybrid is a great marketing ploy. Even though it really doesn't save money. Since it costs about 10K more then the conventional car of the same class.

GM isn't known for being an exciting brand, however now with the Corvette update, the Cobalt SS/Ion Redline duo, Soltice/Sky duo, and a lot of the other SS's. They are strating to go that way. I know with a Trailblazer SS it would be exciting, if AWD and a LS2 doesn't get your heart pumping there is a problem.

Good point.

 

[Joey D]

Personally Hybrids = waste of money, I would never be bothered with one. You get better preformance and sometimes better mileage with a diesel. Although GM is suppousdly working on a diesel hybrid engine for its trucks, which would be sweet as hell.

 

[Swift]

Personally Hybrids = waste of money, I would never be bothered with one. You get better preformance and sometimes better mileage with a diesel. Although GM is suppousdly working on a diesel hybrid engine for its trucks, which would be sweet as hell.

Hybrids(in their current state) are nothing more then a marketing ploy. Period. But perhaps sometime in the near future we can get a car that does 80 mpg. That would make it worth the extra cash, to commuters anyway.

 

[neanderthal]

hybrids are not a waste of time. they may not be all theyre cracked up to be, after all, superminis in europe get better milage out of thier 1.1 liter engines, but they do increase foot traffic to toyotas showrooms and they do extend the halo of earth friendly to the whole brand. nevermind the fact that the sequioa and tundra get milage in the teens.

if my mom is remotely earth freindly and needs a car, her first thought will be a prius. she might go there and decide that its too small or whatever, but would end up in a camry.

boring people with the facts is not going to increase GMs sales anytime soon. while i hate to admitit, perception is greater than reality when it comes to corporate ideology and philosophy.

 

[Swift]

hybrids are not a waste of time. they may not be all theyre cracked up to be, after all, superminis in europe get better milage out of thier 1.1 liter engines, but they do increase foot traffic to toyotas showrooms and they do extend the halo of earth friendly to the whole brand. nevermind the fact that the sequioa and tundra get milage in the teens.

if my mom is remotely earth freindly and needs a car, her first thought will be a prius. she might go there and decide that its too small or whatever, but would end up in a camry.

boring people with the facts is not going to increase GMs sales anytime soon. while i hate to admitit, perception is greater than reality when it comes to corporate ideology and philosophy.

Uh, hybrids are a waste. In their current state. When you look at how much they cost versus how much they save in gas, they are a complete waste. The Geo Metro was a better car for saving gas than any current hybrid on the market.

As you stated, it's about getting people to the showrooms. Marketing. Don't you think that if hybrids were really as "earth friendly" and saved as much gas as a lot of advertising says that everyone would get one? Especially with the ever changing cost of gas?

 

[skip0110]

Exactly, hybrids are for brand image and also bring people into showrooms. For every $3K Toyota looses on a Prius, they bring a few Camry buyers into the showroom that make up that deficit.

GM isn't known for being an exciting brand, however now with the Corvette update, the Cobalt SS/Ion Redline duo, Soltice/Sky duo, and a lot of the other SS's. They are strating to go that way. I know with a Trailblazer SS it would be exciting, if AWD and a LS2 doesn't get your heart pumping there is a problem.

The article and I were talking about exciting styling. Like I said, lots of exciting stuff has been done by GM (Grand National, Syclone, Imp SS, 454SS, even the Regal GS) but it's always wrapped up in rather boring clothes.

 

[Joey D]

I'd rather have a fast boring looking car, then an exciting looking slow car. Granted I drive a Blazer Xtreme which is all style and no power, but then again I have practicality over performance.

But hybirds are a waste of money, period. We used to talk about these in meetings all the time and no body at GM thinks they are worth the money. But they are going to do it to attract those who don't know and think they are earth friendly.

 

[Kylehnat]

^which is why GM is going down the tubes. Cars like the Toyota Prius really suck, but others, like Honda's hybrids, and Lexus' RX330 hybrid, don't. Other companies are using the hybrid technology to enhance their lineup, but not take it over. Using the knowledge gained from these projects (which I believe is called "research"), who knows where these systems might go, and how they might be used in the future. If GM is not taking hybrid technology seriously, they will fall way behind other companies, and will be stuck with lot after lot of 9 mpg SUV's that can't even be given away.

 

[Joey D]

First off the new line of GMT900's will get 16/20 fuel economy which is good for something with a huge V8 and can tow a boat, as well as haul the kids.

Face the facts hybrids are a waste of time, money, and engineering know how. All hybrids suck because you lose money on them. Sure they will save gas, but the intial 10k extra you pay isn't worth it. GM's E85 program is much more suited to handeling the fuel crises.

 

[skip0110]

As Honda and Toyota have proved, hybrids are not really about economy at all, but about improving brand image. Toyota sells a big body-on-frame truck and a big SUV, as well as a smaller SUV and truck, with one more in the pipeline. They make gas-guzzling V8 Lexi. Yet they still are a "green" company. GM makes many efficient cars and some trucks, yet they are not "green" in the buying public's eyes. Hmmm....

I'd rather have a fast boring looking car, then an exciting looking slow car. Granted I drive a Blazer Xtreme which is all style and no power, but then again I have practicality over performance.

So do I, personally. Did you read Zardoz's link? That's not what it was talking about. It was talking about the return of exciting styling to GM.

 

[Joey D]

As Honda and Toyota have proved, hybrids are not really about economy at all, but about improving brand image. Toyota sells a big body-on-frame truck and a big SUV, as well as a smaller SUV and truck, with one more in the pipeline. They make gas-guzzling V8 Lexi. Yet they still are a "green" company. GM makes many efficient cars and some trucks, yet they are not "green" in the buying public's eyes. Hmmm....

That's why GM needs to market their E85 technology more.

So do I, personally. Did you read Zardoz's link? That's not what it was talking about. It was talking about the return of exciting styling to GM.

Ya I read it and I'm saying GM really won't go back to exciting styling because that's not really what they are all about. I mean Pontiac is kinda about that, but each division has there own style.

 

[Disturbed07]

I think the real question here is, can GM make people realize what their vehicles ARE, instead of what they may have been. GM's lineup is not significantly worse (if at all) than any of these competitors, but the buying public is stupid. Never underestimate stupidity, it is undying and unrelenting. I also think GM need to make a good 1.5 liter (or so) gas engine and put it in a small car and go for 40+ mpg with it. = A great marketing ploy, plus, maybe some money to be made as well

 

[Joey D]

GM has tried to make people realize their vehicles don't suck, but you have thick headed morons that can't see that. They have their head in the clouds thinking that Honda, Toyota and Nissan are the chosen car companies by God himself. I like GM products not only because I work there, but because I think they are good cars and trucks...well most of them, sure they have sucktatular vehicles, but so does every company.

I also think GM need to make a good 1.5 liter (or so) gas engine and put it in a small car and go for 40+ mpg with it. = A great marketing ploy, plus, maybe some money to be made as well

Well this has a 1.6L engine in it...

But small engines won't sell well in the US, period.

 

[Disturbed07]

1.6 SI Civics did Either way, there's gotta be a way to get 40mpg out of a small car, it could be the crappy, standard engine, and they could advertise it, bringing in people just the same way the Prius does for Toyota

Sucktacular! -- I like that

 

[neanderthal]

will any of you ninnies who say that hybrids are a waste please tell me how they are a waste as a marketing ploy?

its nice to sit here and conjecture and judge and pontificate, but toyota has chosen to ride the hybrid wave all the way, regardless of how wasteful the cars are compared to reality, a reality where that gives them major marketing clout. GM can spend all its advertising budget touting fuel economy all day and all night, but they will not have out marketed toyota with thier green image halo thats a result of the prius.

from a raw materials/ engineering point of view, sure, it is a waste. from a marketing point of view its a walk- off, grand- slam home run all the from los angeles to tokyo. things arent always black and white. some of you dont see that.

the prius is a great marketing plot. you cant buy/ put a price on the kind of publicity and image that it imparts on not only the toyota brand, but the company as well. that kind of publicity leads to sales. and that leads to a positive cash flow in the balance sheet.

thats what its all about.

 

[Wolfe]

It pisses me off to no end when people dismiss hybrid cars simply because they don't save you money, or take forever to do so.

So #@$*#& what? What could possibly be wrong with a system that does nothing but add power, lower fuel consumption, and greatly reduce emissions?

The only reason hybrids are used as a marketing ploy (which I do agree with) is because the general public is too stupid to understand anything other than MPG, so the other advantages of the system are ignored. Fuel economy is the hot item these days, advertising-wise, so manufacturers deal with what they're given.

But seriously...pull your heads out of your checkbooks and sniff the exhaust fumes of a Prius. Can't smell anything? Exactly.

 

[niky]

Too bad that's a Daewoo... marketing cars like that in Asia gives GM some volume right now, but it's going to kill them in the long run, as Daewoo's reputation for bad quality comes back to bite them in the a$$. There's a lot of very good reasons Daewoo died out while Hyundai and Kia lived, despite all of them having a reputation for making bad cars... because, unlike Kia and Hyundai, Daewoo never progressed beyond that point.

Being a centrist, yes, I'd say hybrids are a cynical marketting ploy... like the hybrid Lexus SUV, or the hybrid Escape... or the nearly useless Honda Insight (you could build a motorcycle-powered kit car with nearly the same fuel consumption and twice the performance of the Insight, without sacrificing handling and braking as badly as the Insight does), but there are definitely benefits beyond MPG.

Engine-shut-down during traffic stops, assist motor/alternator/generator, electric power steering (which is finding purchase in non-hybrids), electric AC (which I hope will come to mass market models too... should save much more gas than the electric PS), cylinder deactivation, regenerative braking... these all have a positive effect on performance and parts longevity (especially for the brakes and engine). I'm hoping someday, what's on the "hybrids" now will make it onto more practical, mass-market cars.

Current "hybrid" owners are subsidizing auto development for us. ...thanks to them, I have an outside chance of buying a V8 in the future that gets 40mpg +.

The Honda Accord hybrid is a step in the right direction. Too bad it has that "image" problem, but that's the way for hybrids to go... enhance everything while sacrificing nothing.

 

[Joey D]

will any of you ninnies who say that hybrids are a waste please tell me how they are a waste as a marketing ploy?

As a car they are a waste, as a marketing ploy they are not, that has been covered.

It pisses me off to no end when people dismiss hybrid cars simply because they don't save you money, or take forever to do so.

Lets take the Honda Accord, probably the best family sedan in America right now. Since the Civic is way to small for the average family I am going to go with the Accord.

Hybrid Verison: Starts at $30,140, gets 29/37 fuel economy, and has 255hp.

Regular Verison: The highest verison with the 6 speed and the NAV system starts at $29,300 ,gets 21/30 fuel economy, and has 244hp.

Sow with a hybrid if you wanted as nice of a car as the regular one you are looking at 7-8 grand more, which is stupid.

I don't see a point to do that to save 7 more miles per gallon, just put a CAI and a powerprogramer on your normal car and you can get slightly better mileage, hell even get better plugs among other things. And most of all just drive easy, which is the cheapest way to save gas.

The only reason hybrids are used as a marketing ploy (which I do agree with) is because the general public is too stupid to understand anything other than MPG, so the other advantages of the system are ignored. Fuel economy is the hot item these days, advertising-wise, so manufacturers deal with what they're given.

Were do you get off on the idea that all cars are bad for the environment? This isn't 1975, cars are very clean compared to older cars. I would rather hurt the environment a tad, drive soemthing gas powered, and be happy.

Too bad that's a Daewoo.

GM owns Daewoo pretty much, hence its a GM product.

 

[skip0110]

Lets take the Honda Accord, probably the best family sedan in America right now. Since the Civic is way to small for the average family I am going to go with the Accord.

Hybrid Verison: Starts at $30,140, gets 29/37 fuel economy, and has 255hp.

Regular Verison: The highest verison with the 6 speed and the NAV system starts at $29,300 ,gets 21/30 fuel economy, and has 244hp.

Sow with a hybrid if you wanted as nice of a car as the regular one you are looking at 7-8 grand more, which is stupid.

I don't see a point to do that to save 7 more miles per gallon, just put a CAI and a powerprogramer on your normal car and you can get slightly better mileage, hell even get better plugs among other things. And most of all just drive easy, which is the cheapest way to save gas.

By the same token you could ask why anyone buys an Acura RL when a gasoline Accord (with a CAI and power programmer, if you must) is nearly the same size and could possibly have the same power.

Image is more important than outright value and the numbers to your average buyer. Like Wolfe2x7 said, you get both better milage, and more power, and cleaner emissions (which you may like to ignore but a lot of buyers care about, and are willing to spend money for). Having a hybrid car is a status symbol, like saying "I'm better, I do something for the environment", and a lot of people will pay for that. Until some new "green" technology come around (and I dont see one in the next decade), hybrids are here to stay, and as battery prices go down, will acutally become profitable.

Also, by your own numbers, the difference betweent he hybrid and the gas car is $1000, not $7000. And with the $3000 hybrid tax credit, the deal looks even better.

GM owns Daewoo pretty much, hence its a GM product.

Niky's point (I think) is that the Aveo was designed by Daewoo and is still made is South Korea. Chevy is ruining what little image they have as reliable by selling a crappy Korean car as a Chevy.

 

[Joey D]

Also, by your own numbers, the difference betweent he hybrid and the gas car is $1000, not $7000. And with the $3000 hybrid tax credit, the deal looks even better.

And what happens when you have to replace the batteries? Or when something breaks on the hybrid car? You are looking at spending an arm and a leg.

 

[skip0110]

And what happens when you have to replace the batteries? Or when something breaks on the hybrid car? You are looking at spending an arm and a leg.

Magazines have postulated the the batteires may have a lifetime of 10 years or so. But we don't know. Nothing says that a hybrid system is any more unreliable, than, say an air suspension, which buyers don't see as a maintenance liability.

I talk to lots of engineering students who will be working and making car payments in the next year. Not very many of them are car nuts, but I ask everyone I knwo what car they want. Most common answer: Toyota Prius. Next most common: Civic Hybrid. These are the "dream cars" of my generation, I guess.

 

[Joey D]

Wow I can honestly say I would never drive a Prius or a Civic hybrid, ever. Why you might ask? They are small, I believe they are a waste of money, and when something breaks on them I don't want to spend a million bucks to get it fixed.

If I want fuel economy I'll get a TDI Jetta/Golf, or hell a Cobalt LS gets decent mileage (while still small though) and its gas powered. I don't know, you'll never convince me a hybrid is the way of the future. I believe hydrogen, ethonol, something else is.

 

[Ghost C]

Nothing says that a hybrid system is any more unreliable, than, say an air suspension, which buyers don't see as a maintenance liability.

That's supposed to somehow be a good thing?

Also, I see alot about how GM isn't exciting right now, blah blah, and nobody mentions the word Cadillac. Even people who hate Cadillac admit that new Cadillacs are beautiful, fast, exciting, amazing - You get the idea.

 

[Tornado]

That's supposed to somehow be a good thing?

Yeah, because if no one has ever questioned the reliabilty of an air suspension, then in this context, hybrids are similar.

Also, I see alot about how GM isn't exciting right now, blah blah, and nobody mentions the word Cadillac. Even people who hate Cadillac admit that new Cadillacs are beautiful, fast, exciting, amazing - You get the idea.

That's because Cadillacs are the exception that prove the rule. Tell me one other car that is not the C6 that can fit under half of "beautiful, fast, exciting, amazing".

 

[Joey D]

Well how about the Soltice/Sky, the Coblat SS/Ion Redline, hell any SS for that matter it fast and exciting. The Trailblazer SS was name "Most fun to Drive" by Truckin magazine that said they haven't had that much fun in a truck since the Typhoon.

 

[Tornado]

So, the only other cars that can come close to Cadillac in GM's lineup is a convertible that is overstyled and just as good as it's rival, a top of the line hot hatch that is smited by an SRT-4 at the track and killed on the road by the Civic Si/RSX Type S, and a performance SUV that has no competition. And that is supposed to balance out the roster of boring, cheap econoboxes and outdated trucks (I know the new ones are coming out. The aren't out yet though.). They are very nice cars, but they do not balance it out. And you can't even say that the magazines love the other SS's, because they don't. They hate the Monte Carlo and Impala SS, they couldn't care less about the other Pontiac's (and don't think the 5.3 Grand Prix is anything special at all), and the only other one that they ever felt anything towards was the VUE Red Line, and then you could just get a faster, better (and now, better looking) SUV from Honda. The ones you named by their names are the only ones any one cares about.

 

[skip0110]

Slight off topic...

I hope they fixed the traction control on the Trailblazer SS because it is absolutely horrid on the regular Trailblazer.

If a wheel looses traction completely, the traction control will lock it. Lift a rear wheel, and when the truck comes down you'll slide sideways!

Not to mention the plastic tub I drain my oil into is of higher quality than the interior plastics.

And the panel gaps at the front are big enough for me to stick my pinky finger into.

 

[Joey D]

So, the only other cars that can come close to Cadillac in GM's lineup is a convertible that is overstyled and just as good as it's rival, a top of the line hot hatch that is smited by an SRT-4 at the track and killed on the road by the Civic Si/RSX Type S, and a performance SUV that has no competition. And that is supposed to balance out the roster of boring, cheap econoboxes and outdated trucks (I know the new ones are coming out. The aren't out yet though.). They are very nice cars, but they do not balance it out. And you can't even say that the magazines love the other SS's, because they don't. They hate the Monte Carlo and Impala SS, they couldn't care less about the other Pontiac's (and don't think the 5.3 Grand Prix is anything special at all), and the only other one that they ever felt anything towards was the VUE Red Line, and then you could just get a faster, better (and now, better looking) SUV from Honda. The ones you named by their names are the only ones any one cares about.

I just named a bunch of cars that are considered exciting. You are just being thick headed when it comes to GM. I also forgot to mention the Pontiac G6 which is a very good car.

The VUE Redline is nothing more then a normal VUE with a body kit. I would much rather have the Pontiac Torrent which is one of the nicest small SUV's I've been in a long time.

GM's truck line isn't terriable and once the 900's come out, I would say that Ford will need to be concerned because the 900's will be better then the current F-150. Also with the small truck line GM is planning on a V8 powered Colorado.

With Pontiac you have the GTO, which is better and faster then both the Charger and the Mustang.

GM might not be the most exciting brand but they are good.

Slight off topic...

I hope they fixed the traction control on the Trailblazer SS because it is absolutely horrid on the regular Trailblazer.

If a wheel looses traction completely, the traction control will lock it. Lift a rear wheel, and when the truck comes down you'll slide sideways!

Not to mention the plastic tub I drain my oil into is of higher quality than the interior plastics.

And the panel gaps at the front are big enough for me to stick my pinky finger into.

I've driven the SS Trailblazer once and I must say I loved the thing even though it was only for a few miles. I would really love to own one. And GM did a lot of improvments to the 06 Trailblazers anyways, so I would imagine the SS got the same thing.

 

[skip0110]

I just named a bunch of cars that are considered exciting. You are just being thick headed when it comes to GM. I also forgot to mention the Pontiac G6 which is a very good car.

It's good but the Malibu/Epsilon platform has not been competitive against the Japanese and is probably just about on par with the Sonata. Does the G6 still have that 3.8 or one of its derivatives, or are they getting serious and putting the new 3.6 VVT in it?

The VUE Redline is nothing more then a normal VUE with a body kit. I would much rather have the Pontiac Torrent which is one of the nicest small SUV's I've been in a long time.

I'd have to agree with Toronado that the only good thing about the Vue is the Honda engine. No one cared about it until it got that engine. And the Torrent has an anemic 185 hp 3.4 V6. Also, aren't parts of it (or maybe just the engine) made in China? I don't trust that build quality in the least.

GM's truck line isn't terriable and once the 900's come out, I would say that Ford will need to be concerned because the 900's will be better then the current F-150. Also with the small truck line GM is planning on a V8 powered Colorado.

I agree with that.

With Pontiac you have the GTO, which is better and faster then both the Charger and the Mustang.

Well, I like the GTO the best out of the three (although, with 4 doors and 4 real seats, the Charger is not a competitor--GM should worry about the Charger stealing Impala sales), but I think you need to make up your mind

Also GM should not be proud of the 5.3 FWD Grand Prix or Impala. Similar concepts and feasibility studes have been floating around at GM since the mid-nineties--and at that time it would have been a great idea! But, it took a decade to bring it to market, and now it's basically ignorable.

I've driven the SS Trailblazer once and I must say I loved the thing even though it was only for a few miles. I would really love to own one. And GM did a lot of improvments to the 06 Trailblazers anyways, so I would imagine the SS got the same thing.

The concept sounds really nice, and if the build/materials quality is better (as you say) then it should make a lot of buyers happy and hopefully get some more people buying the LS, LT, and LTZ Trailblazers.

 

[Joey D]

It's good but the Malibu/Epsilon platform has not been competitive against the Japanese and is probably just about on par with the Sonata. Does the G6 still have that 3.8 or one of its derivatives, or are they getting serious and putting the new 3.6 VVT in it?

Right now you can get the 3.5L V6 or a 3.9L V6 in the SS verison, which I must say is decent. Give it some more time, GM is still trying to develope this platform. Remember the Malibu used to be a crappy little sedan that I believe was also a Geo, so it has come along ways. Not there yet, but still a decent car.

I'd have to agree with Toronado that the only good thing about the Vue is the Honda engine. No one cared about it until it got that engine. And the Torrent has an anemic 185 hp 3.4 V6. Also, aren't parts of it (or maybe just the engine) made in China? I don't trust that build quality in the least.

Not to sound like M5Power here but the FWD VUE is still the 3rd quickest FWD on the market. It's also very under rated. I personally like the Torrent's looks much better, and honestly I'm not sure if parts of them are made in China.

Well, I like the GTO the best out of the three (although, with 4 doors and 4 real seats, the Charger is not a competitor--GM should worry about the Charger stealing Impala sales), but I think you need to make up your mind

Well one magazine put the Charger and the GTO head to head and said the Charger was better even though it's slower, didn't handle as well, and wasn't nearly as good performance wise. However the Charger had a NAV system and better seats so it won. Some how I don't agree with that. I personally hate the Charger and think it sucks save for the SRT-8 verison.

But the GTO and the Mustang as close, jsut because the GTO is better in performance doesn't mean I can't like the Mustang better. Plus the Mustang is cheaper.

Also GM should not be proud of the 5.3 FWD Grand Prix or Impala. Similar concepts and feasibility studes have been floating around at GM since the mid-nineties--and at that time it would have been a great idea! But, it took a decade to bring it to market, and now it's basically ignorable.

Why not? People don't care if there car is FWD or RWD, only car guys do. The general public doesn't give a damn. So why increase the cost of the car to make it RWD?

The concept sounds really nice, and if the build/materials quality is better (as you say) then it should make a lot of buyers happy and hopefully get some more people buying the LS, LT, and LTZ Trailblazers.

The Trailblazer is just as popular as the Blazer was, and the Blazer is like the 3rd most common vehicle on the road or something.