GM/F/C bail out talk
11-18-08, 06:27 PM
#1
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: California
Posts: 6,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GM/F/C bail out talk
OK, so not really but nobody expected the thread title to be true anyway. But during todays testimony in front of the Senate, GM CEO Rick Waggoner made a statement. He said GM had over twenty models that got over 30mpg highway and that was twice as many as any other car manufacturer.
I found it interesting but just kept chewing on it. GM has a lot of different lines, Chevy, Saturn, Hummer, etc., and they have an awfully lot of models. And of course, I am not very impressed with cars that get over 30mpg highway and 15 city which GM has a real tendency to do but I just can't let it go.
Now, I could go Google everything and spend a lot of time but I figured there is more automotive knowledge here that I trust than anywhere. Besides, we have a lot of guys who memorize car brochures so I thought it would be quicker to ask here.
I guess we have to limit to auto makers with models for sale in the US. Waggoner didn't put that restriction on it but it seems fair. And it is models, which means that a model, like the Cobalt, could have multiple versions that get over 30mpg highway, but they only count as one model. Same for Toyota. But if any one versio in a "model" gets over 30mpg highway, it counts. If the RXh gets over 30 mpg highway (just an example, I know hybrids do better city than they do highway, so let's not get all wound up in hybrid mileage) then Toyota would get credit for the RX as a model that gets over 30 mpg highway. And I don't know, Nissan gets credit for Sentra, Honda for Civic, etc.
That makes two questions to fact check. First does the General really have over twenty models that get over 30mph highway (OK, this one is not that interesting but I don't feel like giving it to them). Second, does any other car manufacturer in the US offer no more than 10 models that get over 30 mpg highway? My first notion was that Toyota didn't offer enough separate models but the more I thought about it, the less sure I was that they don't offer more than ten models that get over 30 mpg highway. And Toyota gets Scion as well as Lexus.
So there is the fact check, did Waggoner get it right or was he just blowing smoke up the Senate's skirt?
I found it interesting but just kept chewing on it. GM has a lot of different lines, Chevy, Saturn, Hummer, etc., and they have an awfully lot of models. And of course, I am not very impressed with cars that get over 30mpg highway and 15 city which GM has a real tendency to do but I just can't let it go.
Now, I could go Google everything and spend a lot of time but I figured there is more automotive knowledge here that I trust than anywhere. Besides, we have a lot of guys who memorize car brochures so I thought it would be quicker to ask here.
I guess we have to limit to auto makers with models for sale in the US. Waggoner didn't put that restriction on it but it seems fair. And it is models, which means that a model, like the Cobalt, could have multiple versions that get over 30mpg highway, but they only count as one model. Same for Toyota. But if any one versio in a "model" gets over 30mpg highway, it counts. If the RXh gets over 30 mpg highway (just an example, I know hybrids do better city than they do highway, so let's not get all wound up in hybrid mileage) then Toyota would get credit for the RX as a model that gets over 30 mpg highway. And I don't know, Nissan gets credit for Sentra, Honda for Civic, etc.
That makes two questions to fact check. First does the General really have over twenty models that get over 30mph highway (OK, this one is not that interesting but I don't feel like giving it to them). Second, does any other car manufacturer in the US offer no more than 10 models that get over 30 mpg highway? My first notion was that Toyota didn't offer enough separate models but the more I thought about it, the less sure I was that they don't offer more than ten models that get over 30 mpg highway. And Toyota gets Scion as well as Lexus.
So there is the fact check, did Waggoner get it right or was he just blowing smoke up the Senate's skirt?
11-18-08, 06:44 PM
#2
Lexus Test Driver
I find it interesting that not one U.S. automaker is ranked in the top 12 globally (VW, Toyota one and two respectively)! I say let them burn to the ground.....they got themselves in this mess and it shouldn't take our taxpayers dollars to bail them out
11-18-08, 07:20 PM
#3
it doesnt matter how many models you have, CAFE numbers show averages for all of your vehicles sold. And report came out in July that rated Toyota #1 (for volume manufacturers)...
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/25/t...-year-with-29/
Toyota sold a couple more than that and averaged 29.69 mpg with its lineup of Priuses, Camrys, Corollas and Tundras. The no. 1 brand edged out Honda and Hyundai, which got 29.47 and 29.39 respectively. The Detroit based automakers? Well, not so good. GM, Ford and the then DaimlerChrysler brought up the rear with 25.16, 25.15 and 23.97
11-18-08, 07:29 PM
#4
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: California
Posts: 6,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it doesnt matter how many models you have, CAFE numbers show averages for all of your vehicles sold. And report came out in July that rated Toyota #1 (for volume manufacturers)...
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/25/t...-year-with-29/
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/25/t...-year-with-29/
11-18-08, 07:35 PM
#6
Lexus Fanatic
The mess that GM and Ford are in is partially, but not totally, of their own making. It is true that since the 1970's, the physical quality of American-designed cars has lagged way behind the Japanese competition, with some limited signs of impovement only starting to show up among a few models like the Ford Fusion, Cadillac CTS, and Chevy Malibu.
But, as far as the fuel-economy question is concerned, events have largely been out of Detroit's control. Detroit has often been criticized for not buiklding more smaller, fuel-efficient models, but, even aside from the profitibility factor of large SUV's, relatively cheap gasoline and the desire of the American public have combined to create mostly a demand for large, fairly powerful vehicles. The first question many people want to know is (and, come on now, let's be honest) is not what the MPG is, but what the 0-60 time is.
So, we have a desire for power on one hand. Then, to add to that, when gas DOES go up to a point where it might affect vehicle sales, like it did earlier this year when truck/SUV sales were way off, it never stays high enough to keep it that way. We were at $4.20 a gallon gas as recently as July.....now we're at $2.05, less than half. With a roller-coaster gas-price market like that, how are auto planners and designers supposed to know what kind of vehicles to concentrate on? It's like tossing dice at a crap shoot. Then, to top it off, you have government regulations that keep setting stricter and stricter standards and adding more and more equipment to the vehicles.
So, in a nutshell, the American car companies probably have no one to blame but themselves for poor-quality vehicles, but there is plenty of blame to go around, from many sources, for the other problems they face.
But, as far as the fuel-economy question is concerned, events have largely been out of Detroit's control. Detroit has often been criticized for not buiklding more smaller, fuel-efficient models, but, even aside from the profitibility factor of large SUV's, relatively cheap gasoline and the desire of the American public have combined to create mostly a demand for large, fairly powerful vehicles. The first question many people want to know is (and, come on now, let's be honest) is not what the MPG is, but what the 0-60 time is.
So, we have a desire for power on one hand. Then, to add to that, when gas DOES go up to a point where it might affect vehicle sales, like it did earlier this year when truck/SUV sales were way off, it never stays high enough to keep it that way. We were at $4.20 a gallon gas as recently as July.....now we're at $2.05, less than half. With a roller-coaster gas-price market like that, how are auto planners and designers supposed to know what kind of vehicles to concentrate on? It's like tossing dice at a crap shoot. Then, to top it off, you have government regulations that keep setting stricter and stricter standards and adding more and more equipment to the vehicles.
So, in a nutshell, the American car companies probably have no one to blame but themselves for poor-quality vehicles, but there is plenty of blame to go around, from many sources, for the other problems they face.
11-18-08, 07:36 PM
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
I am sure they do. Thing is Americans would rather an ugly *** Fit that gets worse MPG than the previous model than a comparable American car. GM has dug such a deep reputation hole for themselves, even with better products, less and less people want to give them a chance.
Trending Topics
11-18-08, 07:40 PM
#8
i also agree avg is a much better standard. or another way is to see what is the % of vehicles that are over 30mpg. having 20 models doesn't mean crap to me if they have a total of 70 models under GM. but if they only have 25 models total (you wish), i give them a thumbup
11-18-08, 07:42 PM
#9
Lexus Fanatic
I am sure they do. Thing is Americans would rather an ugly *** Fit that gets worse MPG than the previous model than a comparable American car. GM has dug such a deep reputation hole for themselves, even with better products, less and less people want to give them a chance.
11-18-08, 07:49 PM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Fit is actually one of the few cars that GM can indeed compete with. The Chevy Aveo 2LT, for example (not the base Aveo), simply blows the Fit's versatile but cheaply-done interior away in plushness, quality, and trim. (I'm sure you've seen the photos that me and others have posted). But, of course, the Aveo is not a true GM product, being built by Daewoo of Korea for Chevy.
Pathetic.
11-18-08, 07:50 PM
#11
Lexus Fanatic
i also agree avg is a much better standard. or another way is to see what is the % of vehicles that are over 30mpg. having 20 models doesn't mean crap to me if they have a total of 70 models under GM. but if they only have 25 models total (you wish), i give them a thumbup
Many drivers don't get even the EPA city rating in actual service. Others do better then the EPA highway number.
So, when these politicians and corporate people get together and talk about "mileage", I take most of it with a big grain of........
11-18-08, 08:35 PM
#12
Lexus Champion
The mess that GM and Ford are in is partially, but not totally, of their own making. It is true that since the 1970's, the physical quality of American-designed cars has lagged way behind the Japanese competition, with some limited signs of impovement only starting to show up among a few models like the Ford Fusion, Cadillac CTS, and Chevy Malibu.
But, as far as the fuel-economy question is concerned, events have largely been out of Detroit's control. Detroit has often been criticized for not buiklding more smaller, fuel-efficient models, but, even aside from the profitibility factor of large SUV's, relatively cheap gasoline and the desire of the American public have combined to create mostly a demand for large, fairly powerful vehicles. The first question many people want to know is (and, come on now, let's be honest) is not what the MPG is, but what the 0-60 time is.
So, we have a desire for power on one hand. Then, to add to that, when gas DOES go up to a point where it might affect vehicle sales, like it did earlier this year when truck/SUV sales were way off, it never stays high enough to keep it that way. We were at $4.20 a gallon gas as recently as July.....now we're at $2.05, less than half. With a roller-coaster gas-price market like that, how are auto planners and designers supposed to know what kind of vehicles to concentrate on? It's like tossing dice at a crap shoot. Then, to top it off, you have government regulations that keep setting stricter and stricter standards and adding more and more equipment to the vehicles.
So, in a nutshell, the American car companies probably have no one to blame but themselves for poor-quality vehicles, but there is plenty of blame to go around, from many sources, for the other problems they face.
But, as far as the fuel-economy question is concerned, events have largely been out of Detroit's control. Detroit has often been criticized for not buiklding more smaller, fuel-efficient models, but, even aside from the profitibility factor of large SUV's, relatively cheap gasoline and the desire of the American public have combined to create mostly a demand for large, fairly powerful vehicles. The first question many people want to know is (and, come on now, let's be honest) is not what the MPG is, but what the 0-60 time is.
So, we have a desire for power on one hand. Then, to add to that, when gas DOES go up to a point where it might affect vehicle sales, like it did earlier this year when truck/SUV sales were way off, it never stays high enough to keep it that way. We were at $4.20 a gallon gas as recently as July.....now we're at $2.05, less than half. With a roller-coaster gas-price market like that, how are auto planners and designers supposed to know what kind of vehicles to concentrate on? It's like tossing dice at a crap shoot. Then, to top it off, you have government regulations that keep setting stricter and stricter standards and adding more and more equipment to the vehicles.
So, in a nutshell, the American car companies probably have no one to blame but themselves for poor-quality vehicles, but there is plenty of blame to go around, from many sources, for the other problems they face.
Do you think that over the next 5-10 years that oil is going to become cheaper and more readily available? The answer is the same as it would have been 5-10 years ago....no
Why is it that there are several vehicle manufacturers world wide who were able to grasp this concept and move their companies in a direction that has allowed them to be sustainable and profitable?America's "demand" for horsepower enabled/caused the Big 3 to go in a direction that was instantly profitable to them but not sustainable. If the designers and executives couldn't look past the immediate future and see the bigger picture...they shouldn't be receiving the ridiculous salary/bonuses that they get...but wait...they still are
There are some very basic business concepts that are simply being forgotten or ignored by the automakers. I don't recall them offering to fund the national deficit when they were reaping the immense profits of the SUV craze?
But now, when their poor decision making process has put them in a precarious financial position they expect the taxpayers to buck up? Hmmm....I also don't recall them offering all of these sales incentives when it didn't look like their world was falling apart at the seems? Seems to me they were more inclined to collect every dime they could, while "bragging" (figuratively) about their success and rewarding the top execs with obscene salaries/bonuses. I know their impending difficulties will have far reaching negative impacts...but from a purely business perspective, it is very difficult to feel much sympathy.
11-18-08, 08:43 PM
#13
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Burn to the ground" - stunning. So you're inviting a depression? Have you turned on your television set lately? Do you know what state the economy is currently in? And here some of you are adovating the "burning" of the economies largest manufacturing base. Forget the unprecedented levels of unemployment, just think what affect the multiplyer would have on the loss of GDP to this nation where spending to drop to a standstill. Forget about the unions, forget about all this frankly, garbage, that some people want to make a partisan game out of...Wake up and realize that you can't play with fire, and playing around with something as important as this is not any time for some hashed-over personal views on domestic cars. This is about the US economy, about unemployment, about whether we stay in a sustainable recession, or we spiral uncontrollably into a depression. Some people do not understand.
11-18-08, 08:54 PM
#14
Lexus Champion
Well I see you and many others here and close to no clue what macroeconomics is.
"Burn to the ground" - stunning. So you're inviting a depression? Have you turned on your television set lately? Do you know what state the economy is currently in? And here some of you are adovating the "burning" of the economies largest manufacturing base. Forget the unprecedented levels of unemployment, just think what affect the multiplyer would have on the loss of GDP to this nation where spending to drop to a standstill. Forget about the unions, forget about all this frankly, garbage, that some people want to make a partisan game out of...Wake up and realize that you can't play with fire, and playing around with something as important as this is not any time for some hashed-over personal views on domestic cars. This is about the US economy, about unemployment, about whether we stay in a sustainable recession, or we spiral uncontrollably into a depression. Some people do not understand.
"Burn to the ground" - stunning. So you're inviting a depression? Have you turned on your television set lately? Do you know what state the economy is currently in? And here some of you are adovating the "burning" of the economies largest manufacturing base. Forget the unprecedented levels of unemployment, just think what affect the multiplyer would have on the loss of GDP to this nation where spending to drop to a standstill. Forget about the unions, forget about all this frankly, garbage, that some people want to make a partisan game out of...Wake up and realize that you can't play with fire, and playing around with something as important as this is not any time for some hashed-over personal views on domestic cars. This is about the US economy, about unemployment, about whether we stay in a sustainable recession, or we spiral uncontrollably into a depression. Some people do not understand.
Both sides have valid points and perspectives...the bottom line is that unless both parties are willing to buy into a solution that BENEFITS THE ENTIRE ECONOMY AND ENTIRE COUNTRY...everyone will continue to suffer. Poor political decision making is only compounded by the fact that no one wants to accept responsibility and take a step forward towards a significant change for the better. They are too concerned with the politics and who is to blame. Sad
11-18-08, 08:55 PM
#15
Lexus Test Driver
Well I see you and many others here and close to no clue what macroeconomics is.
"Burn to the ground" - stunning. So you're inviting a depression? Have you turned on your television set lately? Do you know what state the economy is currently in? And here some of you are adovating the "burning" of the economies largest manufacturing base. Forget the unprecedented levels of unemployment, just think what affect the multiplyer would have on the loss of GDP to this nation where spending to drop to a standstill. Forget about the unions, forget about all this frankly, garbage, that some people want to make a partisan game out of...Wake up and realize that you can't play with fire, and playing around with something as important as this is not any time for some hashed-over personal views on domestic cars. This is about the US economy, about unemployment, about whether we stay in a sustainable recession, or we spiral uncontrollably into a depression. Some people do not understand.
"Burn to the ground" - stunning. So you're inviting a depression? Have you turned on your television set lately? Do you know what state the economy is currently in? And here some of you are adovating the "burning" of the economies largest manufacturing base. Forget the unprecedented levels of unemployment, just think what affect the multiplyer would have on the loss of GDP to this nation where spending to drop to a standstill. Forget about the unions, forget about all this frankly, garbage, that some people want to make a partisan game out of...Wake up and realize that you can't play with fire, and playing around with something as important as this is not any time for some hashed-over personal views on domestic cars. This is about the US economy, about unemployment, about whether we stay in a sustainable recession, or we spiral uncontrollably into a depression. Some people do not understand.