Why (some) GM products suck
The Truth About Cars: Why GM Interiors Suck
Paging tw.
Agent X reveals one of the main reasons GM’s interiors failed to match the competition: the executives didn’t know there was a problem. Still don’t. And here’s why . . .
As you probably know, ever since GM was founded, its execs have either been driven by a chauffeur or provided with carefully prepared and maintained examples of the company’s most expensive vehicles. Of course, there are times when the suits must sign off on the company’s more prosaic products.
Since 1953, this intersection between high flyer and mass market occurred at GM’s Mesa, Arizona, Desert Proving Grounds (DPG). The execs would fly into Phoenix’s Sky Harbor airport, limo out to the DPG and drive the company’s latest models.
Our agent says that all the vehicles the execs drove were “ringers.” More specifically, the engineers would tweak the test vehicles to remove any hint of imperfection. “They use a rolling radius machine to choose the best tires, fix the headliner, tighten panel and interior gaps, remove shakes and rattles, repair bodywork—everything and anything.”
Did the execs know this? “Nope. And nobody was going to tell them . . . As far as they knew, the cars were exactly as they would be coming off the line. That’s why Bob Lutz thinks GM’s products are world-class. The ones he’s driven are.”
The American culture of entitlement for top executives is the downfall of their companies. Do they eat lunch in the same cafeteria as their workers, so they can hear some everyday concerns? Of course not, they have special catering and dine with their fellow privileged class. Do they drive the dogshit cars they produce? Of course not, they have limo drivers and private jets. Can they understand the impacts of the decisions they make? No, they never even see them.
Can this culture be changed?
This culture of greed and out of proportion 'need' is certainly part of our downfall. How, though, can that ever be changed, if we just keep on with the status quo?
Can this culture be changed?
Can it be changed? Of course it
can. Just as soon as those who benefit from it voluntarily relinquish it.
On three, inhale. 1... 2... 3...
Hold it...
Hold it...
Keep holding, we'll get back to you...
:3_eyes:
It's a foreign concept to me, because I just don't see the benefit. Private jets, chauffeurs, blah blah blah...who cares? Who wants? I sure don't. I can't see that lifestyle making me happy...I wonder what the draw is? I mean, I know I'm weird but I really have no desire to be in that position.
[QUOTE=Undertoad;573324Can this culture be changed?[/QUOTE]Hmmmmm? I wonder. It will be hard. I think other industries have made an attempt to connect with their workers. But mostly I think that is in the IT industry, Google and Microsoft seem to be in tune. The auto industry is a different animal. A hold over of the way things are done since the days of the RR barrons. It is going to take some serious changes. Same for healthcare.
That looks like a lot of CYA on the part of those engineers. They appear to be deceptive types. Can you imagine? Engineers lying?
That looks like a lot of CYA on the part of those engineers. They appear to be deceptive types. Can you imagine? Engineers lying?
:D;)
There was a program in effect at GM years ago that allowed managers within engineering/design/production to drive new GM vehicles as their own for 3 months at a time at no cost.
Every 3 months that manager would take a vehicle from production and see what the final product was like for the customer. Management would be able to see the results from their decisions from each respective department.
In theory, this would give them the opportunity to evaluate how they performed and see any imperfections that would appear in the first few months of a vehicles use.
I believe this was called the
PEP Program. The managers would drive the cars for a few months and then the employees had the chance to buy them at substancial discount. In some cases 18% off msrp.
Having worked a short time within the GM world, it seems possible that the top brass would not have a clue as to the aesthetic or mechanical quirks the newly assembled models may have. They don't drive them.
It seems less possible that the middle managers would be completely unaware of model specific errors or quirks becuase they were constantly driving them.
Driving them and being aware of problem issues is also quite different from changing the internal process or systems to solve the problems.
IMO GM is too big, too arrogant and has too many chiefs ( not enough Indians ) to make any significant increase in the quality of the cars while lowering the prices, despite the honest efforts of thousands of committed employees.
GM gone broke? It's about time. Maybe they can re-org to something better.
Maybe they can re-org to something better.
Maybe. But it is very difficult to change a culture.
As proven by our politicians.:eyebrow:
What do you guys think about Saturn?
My brother tells me that at Saturn, the price is the price. They don't try to haggle and pull one over on you (which is what happened with the dude from the Honda dealership, at which point I figured there are other cars so if you treat me like I'm an idiot you've lost a sale. I may be a bit naive about the car buying process but I'm not stupid. Boy he made me mad.)
I looked around and I like the Astra.
Anyone with opinions on these cars?
Saturns aren't as good as Hondas, IMHO, but they are OK. When I was shopping for our current car, I looked at the Saturns, and Consumer Reports didn't like them very much.
Nothing is as good as a Honda. :(
I don't know what to do.
Let me add to that that I quickly looked at the Astra, and it looks like it's a re-badged Opel, perhaps not actually built by Saturn. Which could be a good thing.
Quickly looking around, I couldn't see if it was built in Germany or the US.
Look at a Honda, Nissan or Toyota.
Popular Mechanics raves about it.
"the Astra is quite easily the best small car to ever wear the Saturn badge."
It sounds pretty nice.
Thanks guys. This is a big deal for me: I've never done this by myself before. :( I don't want to make a bad decision or be pressured into anything: but I need a new car. My car has 208,000 miles, half of it doesn't work (you know, windows, A/C...) and it's going to just fall into a million pieces on the interstate someday soon.
All advice and opinions are greatly appreciated!
Thanks for the article, they seem to like it.
I will also check local Nissan and Toyota dealers.
All advice and opinions are greatly appreciated!
Well, you should start by deciding what kind of car you want. The Astra is a hatchback. Is a hatchback what you want? (For a single person, I think a hatchback is a very good choice.)
Wasn't the other car a used one? Do you want new or used?
I think a hatchback would be perfect. I looked at the Honda Fit, as well.
New or used, I don't really care. The Civic was in my guidelines for used (2 years old, less than 30k miles) but at this point I'm not so sold on that anymore, especially after reading and hearing opinions on buy new vs. used.
I'm torn, I guess.
Can you pay cash for new, or would you need to finance?
Hahahaaa...finance. I do have a decent down payment.
What do you guys think about Saturn?
Saturn never made a profit. Saturn could sell every car made. But to make a profit, Saturn needed a second assembly line. GM said they could not have that second assembly line until they made a profit. Catch-22.
So Saturn sold out to GM about a decade ago. Saturn had to accept cars designed by GM corporate. That included moving production to GM assembly plants such as in Delaware to share assembly with other GM products. It is another GM car just like Chevy.
Astra is not on Consumer Reports recommended list. However it does have one redeeming quality. It has a 70 horsepower per liter engine meaning that the engine probably does not come from GM North America.
Saturn's reliability (by brand) is one of the lowest with Land Rover, Chrysler, and Cadillac. Those reliability numbers are contrary to popular myth. Do you want the image - or reliable transportation? The only Saturn considered reasonable is the Outlook.
Note the difference between those with perception verses real world experience. Above is what we know when divorced from emotion and spin. What we don't know is what will happen to Saturn (and your Saturn dealer) in the future. Saturn will continue to buy their products from GM's manufacturing plants because Saturn had to surrender independence to survive. Saturn had to let GM control its product line and who actually makes the cars. It’s still the same GM assembly plants that also make other unreliable GM cars. We still don't know what will happen to Saturn - and its dealers.
Best cars for value: Honda Accord, Civic and hybrid, Fit, Hyundai Elantra and Sonata, Toyota Corolla, Prius, and Camray Hybrid. It’s not just the sticker price. These are the cars that also cost less after five years of paying for everything.
In a list of best value, not one Saturn makes the list. Of 300 vehicles, Consumer Reports recommended 55. Of the 12 in Astra's category, Astra was near the bottom alongside Chrysler's PT Cruiser, Chevy HHR, and Dodge Caliber. Even the Pontiac Vibe got a better rating.
Whereas the Astra is too new to make the list, other Saturns of various years including Ion, Vue, Outlook, Relay, and Sky made the list of used cars to avoid. And still some will recommend Saturn products? On what? Image? Promise?
Listed were manufacturers to talk to. No matter how large that sticker price may appear, those are cars that traditionally cost you less money and headaches.
What will happen to your Saturn dealer once Saturn is sold off to become some other automaker? The obvious choices are well proven by history AND because those automakers continued to innovate.
Let's see. The GM service rep arrives at a dealer to reimburse for defects in new GM cars. Tire pressure measures off by 2 PSI. The entire warranty was voided on that trivial problem. What happens to your Saturn warranties? GM dealers get stuck with the costs. So your dealer will do everything necessary to avoid honoring that warranty. Just another fact that does not exist where cars earned their reputation - are not recommended on perception and emotion.
"the Astra is quite easily the best small car to ever wear the Saturn badge."
And then the same article says
The power rack-and-pinion steering is quick and precise, driven by a hydraulic pump that, in turn, is driven by an electric motor to reduce the drain on engine power.
Where does that 'expert' think the electric power comes from? Obviously draining from the same engine power. Meanwhile, better cars have long used speed sensitive steering. That means it does not need to draw power when the vehicle is moving. Only when stopped or moving less than 5 MPH. Why is steering draining engine power? Either because it does not have the now 'all but required' speed sensitive steering, OR that author does not know much about cars.
The devil is in the details.
Author got one point right. Its engine is not the crappy shit that is routine in most all GM products.
Author also forgot to mention who may end up with Opel (and therefore Saturn). Fiat.
So to sum up your post, the Astra isn't on the list of recommended cars because it is too new. Previous Saturns were crap and didn't make it on the list. But this Saturn which is probably made in Germany by Opel was not considered for the list. Why even mention the list if the Astra wasn't considered? It's not relevant or helpful.
The steering is not relevant either. The article talks about how the power steering is provided, not the speed at which it is engaged. The reviewer liked the feel of the steering. One can assume that it is the speed sensitive steering when the article uses words like "quick and precise."
I'm surprise you aren't shouting from the rooftops how awesome this car is because it meets your long held 70hp/liter standard.
[YOUTUBEWIDE]PAwX-brllj0[/YOUTUBEWIDE]
Shawnee, it's hard for me to give advice. All I can do is say what I would do in a situation. I would buy a used car if I couldn't afford to pay cash for a new one, but I know a lot of people who would disagree with me.
I'd go for a hatchback made by Honda or Toyota (or their subsidiary Scion.) I would haggle with a private owner based on research I would do to learn blue book values etc. I recognize that you hate haggling, so you should check out what Carmax has to offer. I personally think Carmax prices are too high, but they do clean the cars up really well, and offer warranties and a fixed price. The used cars at Carmax seem like new cars, they are so nice.
But first, I'd go to the bookstore and get the Consumer Reports used car buying guide and read the front sections in their entirety and then the specific sections about hatchbacks.
The stereo has a non-standard, built-in setup which makes it impossible to replace, and does not include an AUX Input jack. That's enough FAIL for me.
Aside from the quality or appropriateness of an Astra for your situation, don't be fooled by the "we offer the best price with no haggling!" line. That doesn't necessarily mean their prices are actually lower, it just means they want to tell you not to ask for it to go any lower. Right now car dealerships are really hurting, and you can get like 20% off sticker price if you pick the right car/place.
I don't care about paying cash: any car I get, new or used, will be in that price range. With a 40 minute commute each way, and since I plan to work here for a while, I won't buy a 500 dollar car: I'd just be right where I am now. Who doesn't finance? I don't know too many people who have thousands in cash lying around.
I don't give one hoot about the music capabilities: will it play the radio and my CDs? Good enough.
Right now car dealerships are really hurting, and you can get like 20% off sticker price if you pick the right car/place.
Sure, if you can do that kind of thing. My whole point is that I am not a haggler, not good at bargaining, and I find the whole normal car-buying back and forth very stressful and uncomfortable. I just want a car: why does it have to be so damn sneaky snaky?
@ jim: I'll have to watch the motorweek (I love that show :) ) clip later from home.
damned predatory opportuninstic consumers
:lol:
I'm just a big wimp about this kind of thing.
just pretend they are ... you know who. That should take care of your timidity pretty quick.
damned predatory opportuninstic consumers
Meh. Lots of salespeople are honest. We just bought a car from one not too long ago. But you can't blame folks for being bitter.
But this Saturn which is probably made in Germany by Opel was not considered for the list. Why even mention the list if the Astra wasn't considered? ...
The steering is not relevant either.
The list says everything about Saturns - and Astra. Only reason for quality or perverted products: 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management. When did Saturn get all management replaced four and more years ago?
Saturn is probably made in America even if the engine is an Opel design. For example, Ford's early 1970 Capri was one of the best driving cars. The American version of that car with the same engine was called Pinto. Even the same engine (2.3 liter with same Holley 5210C) performed completely different. "Opel" means, "It has potential." Nothing more.
That driver/reviewer likes steering that is not speed sensitive? Says a lot about the reviewer's integrity. Many also loved how Oldsmobiles and Pontiacs handled - even though those cars wandered all over the road. If its not speed sensitive (a mid-1980 technology), then does he really does not know how it handles. So where does he discuss a car that does handle good - such as the Ford Focus? Does he know anything about the product - or just hype "More Power".
Speed sensitive means the steering wheel (and driver) is engaged with the road - information that can even save your life (and other advantages).
70 Hp per liter is a requirement for all cars. You have assumed binary logic in a world that is ternary. If the car has a 70 Hp per liter engine and no brakes, is it still acceptable? 70 Hp per liter does not say it is good. But a car without 70 Hp per liter is bad - better sent from the factory to the junk yard.
Most GM products do not have a 70 Hp per liter engine. 70 Hp per liter says the Astra is at least one step above shit.
Don't waste time with Saturn only because someone feels it is good and then recommends it. Saturn has a poor reputation when we ignore popular myths and deal only with facts. Saturn had to concede and sell out to GM a decade ago just to survive. All those lists only confirm that reality.
Good reasons why companies such as Honda and Toyota have 70 Hp per liter engines in all cars for well over a decade. And why their dealers don't get screwed for warranty work. And why the service bulletins for those cars are so few. 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management. That Astra is a product of Rick Wagoner.
Why did GM do a campaign to bankrupt the LA Times? LA Times did a story that actually told the truth about GM products in April 2005. GM cannot let you know the truth. Did something change in only 3 years? Why is GM again screwing dealers with warranty costs? Too many product failures. Don't even waste time with Saturn.
Listed by others and me are numerous responsible manufacturers. Those many lists say it best. Reliable brands include Scion, Acura, Honda, Toyota, Lexus, Infinity, Subaru, Hyundai, Kia, Lincoln, Mazda, etc. Even Ford (because Jacque Nasser was removed only recently - 8 years ago) has move back up to average reliability.
Even the Ford Focus is a superior consideration. It was never about foreign verses domestic products. It was always about who designed and built the car - bean counters or car guys. Free market principles prevail.
Speed-sensitive steering is standard on the XR models.
Not on all models. Why not? Which model was tested by Popular Mechanics?
Meanwhile, avoid the Saturn. It does not have reliability and value so often touted by those who 'feel' rather than learn.
Having said that, if Fiat does get Opel, then will Saturn be saved?
What did Marchionne do to save Fiat? What is he expected to do to save Chrysler? Remove the #1 problem - top management. 85% of all problems - including Saturn's poor reliability - would be directly traceable to top management. Buying a Saturn also says, "Keep destroying America. Keep destroying American jobs."
UT's many points posted up top are old news. DeLorean defined them in his 1970s book "On a Clear Day, You Can See GM". MaryAnn Keller defined them accurately and bluntly (ie The Reckoning(?)) - which is why GM banned GM employees from taking interviews with her. The LA Times defined the problem in 2005 - so GM tried to bankrupt the LA Times. And Michelle Maynard (?) of the NY Times has been quite blunt about this. The many points needed no response because some were defined even by Ralph Nader in the early 1960s - "Unsafe at Any Speed".
Problems have remained that long and were that well understood. For 30 years, GM would not put a major innovation in any car until required by a government regulation. GM did exactly what is taught in business schools. UT's points have been routinely known for decades.
Meh. Lots of salespeople are honest. We just bought a car from one not too long ago. But you can't blame folks for being bitter.
oh..i was just being ironic. Not hard to shine in this business. It's pretty much down to not being a dick and not lying. If i had a nickel for every time i heard a customer tell me that we treat them SO much better than the OTHER place they went to....
...that might be
slightly tilted, actually, since I only meet them if they make it past the salesmen.
I refer to the 'Filter Effect' when speaking about salesmen with other managers sometimes. What I mean is that if a customer actually buys a car from some of theses guys, then they have to be somewhat trusting or gullible. Some of the better salesmen have a zero filter rating....meaning....they can deal with just about anyone and sell them a car if they're buying.
Yeah, you can see her playing hard-to-get already. :lol:
If in doubt, get a corolla. They go for evah. Engineered by autistic savants and built by anal retentives.
Yeah, you can see her playing hard-to-get already. :lol:
If in doubt, get a corolla. They go for evah. Engineered by autistic savants and built by anal retentives.
Well, I'm sold.
Yeah, you can always tell how good a model is by the number of uni students driving them 20yrs later.
2009 - 1992 = 17 year old corolla in driveway... had it 18 months, no trouble at all.
I occasionally see late '70s corollas about, they're quite recognisable.
Heee, in college I drove a 73 Impala. That 450 engine would still kick it!
I might just drive this car until it actually dies. It seems to be the right thing to do, for a car that has hung in for so long. I'm in no hurry, though it seems I am. :)
And P.S. I would totally buy a car from LJ...I just am thinking about the distance and the costs involved there. There are some great salespeople out there, my younger sis-in-law being one, and I was put off by the local Honda online guy's approach. I might get a better experience if I just look around.
85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management.
from now on, on the
lumbernet, if you type
tw% it comes out: '85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management'
Is it just how Motorweek presents cars, that I was feeling like I had made a nice preliminary decision on a car?
I think I might like an Astra. 3 door. Sunroof? I haven't seen one at the local dealer which included sunroof. Standard shift is perfect because I'd rather drive a manual transmission.
:)
Shawnee, when I bought my Sentra I was able to pit two dealerships against each other. I was actually able to get the price down by $1500 doing that.
This is why my family tells me to bring my sis-in-law along: she gets great deals, is in a different line of sales but is pretty damn good at it. Other than that, I can't bargain on my own, because I don't understand the baseline things you ask for to even know where to start.
Do I say "I'll give you a buck fifty for this car." No. That's unreasonable. Yet, it might as well be where to start for as much as I know about cars pricing and bartering.
Still, if I could do it on my own I'd rather. Tell me where to start.
Shawnee - if you pay the $30 fee for online access to consumer reports you can dig around and find the dealer cost for any model of car. Dealers also get kickbacks from the manufacturer so their price is actually below the official dealer cost.
Just last winter we donated our 1987 Accord and bought a new one. We got it for $800 below dealer cost. We might have done somewhat better than that, but we wanted a stick-shift which they didn't have on the lot.
Thanks dar, I'll look into it. :)
Look at a Honda, Nissan or Toyota.
I agree. I have been a Ford person for many a year. But none of them have lasted as long as the Honda and Toyota's we own. I stll think they are a good cheaper alternative if you can't afford one of the others.
BTW - I've owned three Nissans - they all went about 250k before I sold/traded them in on the next one. They were all bought used - about 50k and were driven hard. I was an on the road salesman and put some serious local miles on them - not highway cruising. Tons of stopping and starting, braking... and so on. Just keep the oil changed regularly and you should be good to go.
BTW, I'm on my 4th one now.
Am I not asking the right questions?
I can't bargain on my own, because I don't understand the baseline things you ask for to even know where to start.
Do I say "I'll give you a buck fifty for this car." No. That's unreasonable. Yet, it might as well be where to start for as much as I know about cars pricing and bartering.
Still, if I could do it on my own I'd rather. Tell me where to start.
The draw of the Astra is the
no bargaining.
I understand the draw of the JapCar, you don't have to sell me on a Honda. Have I mentioned my old CRX? About 9000 times.
Reading back you can see why I changed my tack.
:(
DO NOT BUY A SATURN. GET A USED JAPCAR.
Yabbut, did you see that Motorweek vid?
Hmmmmm? I wonder. It will be hard. I think other industries have made an attempt to connect with their workers. But mostly I think that is in the IT industry, Google and Microsoft seem to be in tune. The auto industry is a different animal. A hold over of the way things are done since the days of the RR barrons. It is going to take some serious changes. Same for healthcare.
And let's not forget wall street.
On another note, I watched this show on Planet Green the other day called Futurecar. It was about the fuels that will be replacing gasoline. GM had a car featured, although I can't recall which fuel it ran on. If GM can create more cars like that one they should be fine.
The show was awsome. You should check it out if you get a chance. It should come on again. The future will hold many different kinds of fuel so people will have a choice. And one of the Norwegian countries is already building a hydrogen highway!
What do you guys think about Saturn?
My brother tells me that at Saturn, the price is the price. They don't try to haggle and pull one over on you (which is what happened with the dude from the Honda dealership, at which point I figured there are other cars so if you treat me like I'm an idiot you've lost a sale. I may be a bit naive about the car buying process but I'm not stupid. Boy he made me mad.)
I looked around and I like the Astra.
Anyone with opinions on these cars?
My sister has a Saturn and she loves it. And the people at the dealership are great. For the first 3 years she got free car washes and oil changes. :)
Thank you sugar. :)
I'm still thinking (at this pace it will be four more years) but I do like that Astra. Then again, I fall in love with cute sporty cars easily.
Yeah, you can see her playing hard-to-get already. :lol:
If in doubt, get a corolla. They go for evah. Engineered by autistic savants and built by anal retentives.
Corollas get great gas milage as well, one of the best on the road. And if you coast a lot you can milage comparable to a hybrid. (I coast all the time when I drive my Geo.) They also have a very high resale value.
Thank you sugar. :)
I'm still thinking (at this pace it will be four more years) but I do like that Astra. Then again, I fall in love with cute sporty cars easily.
btw, Congress recently passed a Cash for Clunkers stimulus. You can get up to $4500 (I think) back for your clunker to get a new car. I believe they give you a voucher and you use it toward your purchase. It has to be a new car though. Bummer, because Dianne Feinstein was apparently working on a BETTER plan with a fellow republican, but this one passed instead. It's not nearly as good, but still, you should take advantage of it if you can.
Hmmm, I found this:
Q: If the House bill becomes law, how would it work?
A: The government would send up to $4,500 to the selling dealer on your behalf, if you:
1. Trade in a car that — this is a key point — has been registered and in use for at least a year, and has a federal combined city/highway fuel-economy rating of 18 or fewer miles per gallon.
2. Buy a new car, priced at $45,000 or less and rated at least 4 mpg better than the old one (gets a $3,500 voucher). If the new one gets at least 10 mpg better, you get the full $4,500.
Example: Trade that well-worn 1985 Chevrolet Impala V-8 police special, rated 14 mpg, for a 2009 Impala V-8 rated 19 mpg and the government will kick in $3,500. Downsize to Chevy Cobalt (27 mpg) or even a larger Honda Accord (24 mpg) and get $4,500.
Mileage ratings back to 1985 are at www.fueleconomy.gov.
(USA Today article)
I looked up my car at fueleconomy and it doesn't qualify.
Damn. I'm sorry Shawnee. From what they were saying when it passed in committee, I don't remember those restrictions. Oh well.
For cars, the milage is 22, not 18, according to this one website.
http://www.cashforclunkersfacts.com/
Summary of Cash for Clunkers Voucher Qualifications
Min. Fuel Economy for New Vehicle - Passenger Car 22 mpg
Mileage improvement of at least 4 mpg - $3,500 Voucher
Mileage improvement of at least 10 mpg - $4,500 Voucher
Light-Duty Truck ** 18 mpg *
Mileage improvement of at least 2 mpg - $3,500 Voucher
Mileage improvement of at least 5 mpg - $4,500 Voucher
Large Light-Duty Trucks *** 15 mpg *
Mileage improvement of at least 1 mpg or trade-in of a work truck - $3,500 Voucher
Mileage improvement of at least 2 mpg - $4,500 Voucher
Mileage improvement of only 1 or 2 miles per gallon for trucks? Are you freaking kidding me? grrrrrr that pisses me off! Why the fuck do TRUCKS always get off easy! They pollute the most and get the WORST mileage!
Such a long time off, and yet all that vim and vigor didn't simmer down one bit, huh?
Out of curiosity, what things don't make you "soooooOOOOoooo mad," sugar?
Don't you think if they are going to pass legislation to give people money to trade in their cars or trucks, it should be for more than 1 or 2 mpg, especially on a vehicle that already gets crappy gas mileage? Do you really want to the government to be subsidizing gas gussling vehicles? Because I certainly don't.
I am actually a lot happier now than I was before. Probably because I haven't been spending a lot of time online debating politics or watching the news. :D
Personally, I'd rather they spent that money reducing the incredible debt we have and reducing our monetary dependence on China. That or stop spending money we don't have. Theres a novel idea.
I agree. The automobile industry has gotten enough money. They didn't need this as well. Although, I imagine some people could use it to help them get a new car. I just wish, if they were going to do this, they would have done it a lot smarter.
or... STOP THE FUCKIN SPENDING!
yea. They could do that as well.
Personally, I thought it was stupid and sneaky to put that in the last supplemental for war spending. It should have been somewhere else.
NEWSFLASH
Sugarpop and Classicman have agreed on something!
In other news, lions have been seen in compromising positions with lambs, and a pig has disappeared off radar somewhere over the North Pacific.
NEWSFLASH
Sugarpop and Classicman have agreed on something!
Will wonders ever cease?
... and now over to Bealzebub, with the weather report, and it seems we're expecting snow flurries and subzero temperatures as far down as the fifth circle ...
After all these years of abusing my automobile's appearance in hopes of reducing it's value, it seems that my car is now worth at least $3500. How depressing.
All the past years of old fast food wrappers in the cavity where the death seat used to be, the discapline of not washing it for years on end, using the hood as a work table complete with corresponding scratches and chemical spills have been a wasted effort.
How else might I devalue my POS so as to convince the world at large that I don't have 2 nickels to rub together and that my car is not worth stealing or vandalizing?
Years of consistent (non) effort....wasted. :(
LOL ... but easy. Spend heaps converting it to a hybrid drive system. Then you can't get the trade in cause you wont be improving your economy.
Spend, man, spend, spend, spend. That's what'll fix this : manic grin :
.......converting it to a hybrid drive system.
Would a small team of amish horses change it's catagory to "hybrid"? :biggrin:
Oh yeah. That clunky horse hitch on the front. Yeah, that would scream "don't bother stealing this car (buggy)"
or... STOP THE FUCKIN SPENDING!
They can't. The spigot is open for the next 4 years. There is a complete loss of self control.
Wow - how succinct is that?
Pretty much sums up my feelings about it.
Wow - how succinct is that?
It's a bit tough on Ford, epsecially since it's a Ford vehicle pictured, when they haven't taken any Bailout money, and have done the best of the Detroit three to up quality to match foreign owned brands ( who's quality has dropped helpfully) and produce some better vehicles.
Apparently they will be screwed by not taking the handouts and declaring bankruptcy, becaue they have borrowed heavily to retool, whereas Chrysler and GM will come out debt free. :yeldead:
Was also hoping the cash for clunkers program would smooth the way to a new minivan, the MPG stats on a 2009 Honda Odyssey are exactly the same as a 2001 Ford Windstar :(
Yes, gas mileage has actually gone down over the years, instead of up. It's sickening. And on this show I watched recently (Futurecar), they said that only 25% of the fuel is actually used to propell the car. 75% comes out the tailpipe. I was stunned! How extremely inefficient is that, and STUPID? Other forms of fuel don't have that inefficiency.
I've wondered about that too. An expensive hybrid gets about what my 1990 CRX used to get, and way less than the CRX HF model got.
Again, something's rotten.
only 25% of the fuel is actually used to propell the car. 75% comes out the tailpipe. I was stunned! How extremely inefficient is that, and STUPID? Other forms of fuel don't have that inefficiency.
You should totally ask tw what he thinks about that... ;)
... they said that only 25% of the fuel is actually used to propell the car. 75% comes out the tailpipe.
Where were you when those numbers (along with maybe 100 others) were posted?
In ten gallons of gasoline, something above 1 gallon does productive work. No, not all that energy is lost in a tail pipe. Other losses include heat (ie radiator) and vibration. What are the world's lowest performance cars? Ones that make the most noise. Crappiest vehicles include most every truck and car with a V-8 including Mustang, noisy Corvette, Camaro, etc.
Another myth is pollution control. Fools believed what was told without facts and numbers. Propaganda experts, spin doctors, and business school graduates said more pollution control means lower gas mileage, less horsepower, and slower cars. Reality. How to increase gas mileage and increase performance? Decrease pollution.
What does a catalytic converter do? If you don't know this, then you were always part of the problem. Burns the gasoline that the engine didn't. Burns gasoline that should have been making energy in the engine.
Hydrocarbons burned in an engine means less pollution, increased efficiency, and more horsepower from a smaller engine. Nitrogen oxides broken up into non-pollutants (nitrogen and oxygen) also create more productive energy. But many American auto executives (and the politicians who protected them) had a George Jr brain. So they lied (to us and themselves). Too many of us also worshipped George Jr's brain; believed those lies.
If three out of every ten purchased gallons of gas did something productive, then global warming, pollution, and the energy crisis are averted. But since so many of us so hated the world as to buy GM cars (tell GM to not innovate) and promote other myths such as ethanol and hydrogen, then something close to 1 out of every 10 gallons is productive. The waste is that massive.
Those numbers assumed we need 200+ hp engines. Another solution just waiting for innovators to solve. A 60,000 pound 18 wheeler only needs 350 or 500 horsepower. Why does a vehicle 30 times lighter need 200+ horsepower? It does not. But we install engines with ten times too much horsepower so that innovation need not be done. So much stifled innovation all to the glory of people with a George Jr intelligence level.
The opportunity for innovation and its resulting advantages are that large.
What do wackos want? Drill, drill, drill! Wackos cannot innovate, cannot admit what the real problem is, and only understand "More Power" - a Tim Allen joke about people who remain that dumb. Wackos want "More Oil". Then wackos can get their $40million paychecks while stifling innovation.
Yes, much less gasoline (than your numbers) does productive work. Well understood by those who used the same logic that also challenged the Saddam WMD myths.
Your numbers give automobiles too much credit. Those numbers say how easily we could massively reduce our energy consumption if we built gas ovens to cook MBAs and wacko politicians inside them.
Notice, I did not give numbers for the amount of energy saved and usefully used; if we only burned the problem - and not its symptoms.
This thread had seemed somehow incomplete, until now. :D
Used Car Lemons and Lemonade
Check out our list of the best and worst used cars. Remember, while this list is a good start, all used cars are different. Before buying, make sure you give any used car -- even one on our best list -- a thorough inspection.
Worst Used Cars:
GMC Canyon
Chrysler Sebring
Ford Explorer
Dodge Intrepid
Pontiac Aztek
Best Used Cars:
Honda Civic
Subaru Impreza
Toyota Prius
Ford Mustang
Mazda MX-5 Miata
Not very surprising - except for the mustang.
The Aztek is on the worst list because it's ugly as sin, and the mustang is on the best list because it's popular. Not very comprehensive.:eyebrow:
I was wondering if this was more of a popularity list - The American cars bad - foreign good.
FWIW - My dads explorer has 260 on it and is still running strong.
Oh and Mazda Miata??? :eyebrow:
Perhaps tw will ask why they hate America so much to even publish that list. j/k
Now that GM cannot take revenge on honest reporters, the reporter said what he really saw. From the NY Times of 23 Jun 2009 is the description of a crap design implemented only so that the world 'hybrid' can appear on its sheet metal:
A G.M. Hybrid That Misses the High Notes
Queried about the hybrid — how many they would build, when we might see it — officials hemmed and hawed like parents pressed for the whereabouts of a pregnant teenage daughter.
Now we know why. ... But it’s time to add the Malibu Hybrid to the growing pile of hybrid failures from General Motors.
These half-hearted efforts have included pickups (now defunct) that couldn’t save fuel, but could run your power tools. Even the guys who wear tool belts to weddings wouldn’t bite. Then G.M rolled out full-size hybrid S.U.V.’s from Cadillac, Chevy and GMC. These 20-m.p.g. behemoths have proved as popular as the A.I.G. corporate jet.
And last week ... G.M. abruptly pulled the plug on the car after just a year of production. In May, Chevy sold just 706 Malibu Hybrids, along with only 35 units of its sister car, the Saturn Aura Hybrid.
The Aura and Malibu are so-called mild hybrids, which makes them as authentic as supermarket salsa. To keep the price down, the Malibu forgoes the things that let full hybrids generate impressive mileage: a large electric motor that can propel the car with no help from the engine, a sizable battery pack and a continuously variable transmission to efficiently mix and match electric and gas power.
Instead, the Malibu adopts a simple motor-generator driven by a wide engine belt and connected to a small nickel-metal-hydride battery pack in the trunk. ... Unlike full hybrids, the system delivers only supplementary squirts of electricity; aside from automatically shutting down and restarting at stoplights, the engine is always on duty.
What is the Saturn? Just a Chevy with a different name. Business school graduates are still designing GM cars.
It's a hybrid only if one thinks an MBA can be honest. It is exactly what happens when Rick Wagoner got promoted Chairman of all GM because he ran GM North America into record losses. Another trophy for bean counters - and also why Ford need not run to the government for protection. When do we fire up the oven in Detroit - so that business school graduates will be removed?
Hell, stick a hamster on a treadmill in the glove compartment, use the little fella to power the dome light, and voila! ECO-GREEN HYBRID SYNERGY BIO-DRIVE!!!
Yes, gas mileage has actually gone down over the years, instead of up. It's sickening. And on this show I watched recently (Futurecar), they said that only 25% of the fuel is actually used to propell the car. 75% comes out the tailpipe. I was stunned! How extremely inefficient is that, and STUPID? Other forms of fuel don't have that inefficiency.
Though about the best you can see (in recent electrical generating plants) is right around 50%, up from around 35% thirty years ago.
A good part of this is actually due to the piston engine: roughly a fifth of the heat energy developed inside the cylinder with every firing is needed to exhaust the combustion gases out the exhaust valve. This is one reason aero engine makers stopped developing piston power about the end of WW2 and the turboprop engine came out, and this is also why turboprop engines are small, shaft horsepower for shaft horsepower.
Turbosupercharging came around as one way to scavenge some of that thrown-away heat energy. Handling a lot of turbosupercharging power was the reason the WW2 Thunderbolt was so bulky a fighter plane; it was full of ducts, behind a great big two-row radial engine.
Tiny turboshaft engines for automobiles probably best suit an electric powertrain, though: spin an alternator, not a transmission and driveshaft, feeding two or more electric motors turning the wheels. It works for locomotives...
