MPLexus301

iTrader: (3)

http://www.motorauthority.com/blog/1...ality-concerns

Sad to see them struggling with what seems like an otherwise great car. This is somewhat alarming to me considering the quality problems that the Camaro has had as well. There were some earlier reports of electrical issues with some of the early test cars, so I wonder if that is what they are referring to. Hopefully things aren't falling apart at GM...

LexBob2

It is too bad. All of their national print ads are running and a couple of dealers around here have advertised it as being available for sale. One dealer has one in their showroom, but for display only. The caution might pay off in the long run though.

IS-SV

It's bad, but they must get it right before releasing to public. Today there is no excuse for subpar first year launches.

TripleL

I agree. While unfortunate that they have these issues I agree hold back, get it right and then roll out.

My hope is that once this is resolved they will do a proper analysis so they can learn from this and not repeat it again.

CDNROCKIES

Between this and the Camaro, just further proof that GM is not capable of running a successful company and should have been forced into bankruptcy. Now that they're operating on the tax payer dollar you would think they would have improved their quality controls. Obviously they haven't.

mmarshall

You're jumping to conclusions here. GM is not the only company that sometimes has start-up glitches with new models...or even existing ones. Do you remember, for example, my review of a new BMW M3 last year (a $63,000 vehicle), and what I found on that car before I even got the engine started?

And as far as bankrupcy goes, GM was forced to lay off a number of its employees as part of the settlement program....you can blame the Government and the company bean-counters for that. Some of those laid-off employees could (?) have been crucial to maintaining quality control. Before the bankrupcy actually occured, for instance, the new Chevy Malibu, Saturn Aura, and a number of Buick models proved that GM could do a quality product. All of those vehicles have been better-than-average in reliability.

mmarshall

Toyota and Lexus are not immune from start-up goofs either. Remember what happened recently with the Camry V6 automatic transmissions?....and the flimsy Tundra tailgates that bent from the loads?

CDNROCKIES

Sorry Mike but you're missing my point.

The bottom line is if the tax payers are paying for it, you would think that GM would do everything in it's power to improve it's operations. Yes, every manufacturer has issues with first year model cars but not as consistently as with the Camaro and LaCrosse.

How is a company that is being funded by the tax payers going to gain the trust and loyalty of it's customers? They were already to the brink of bankruptcy and yet they don't change one of their fundamental problems?

Good to see that GM has changed their way of thinking and the car czar is pushing for change.

daryll40

I'll bet this is a stunt. Probably the quality of the already released cars is no better or worse than the usual GM stuff. This makes it LOOK like there is some "new" concern for quality. Great stunt GM!

mmarshall

I do have a number of review requests for this car, however, and plan to review it whenever it becomes available. The Buick people, here in my area, say about 10 days to two weeks now.

Byprodrive

iTrader: (1)

Most if not all manufacturers have unresolved issues when a new model is released for sale what varies is their level of acceptability

mmarshall

The problem is that so many of its employees are gone that some serious brain drain (and quality control) might have gone with it. That's not an issue of taxes or taxpayers....that's simply an issue of having (maybe) laid off too many employees. And those big layoffs were part of the government (and taxpayer) settlement plan. You generally can't have government taking over auto firms without negative effects.....this may be proof of that.

Quality glitches can, and do, happen anytime.....not just with first-year models. That's why I included the M3 sample I reviewed last year.

You're overlooking the fact that government and taxpayers may have been THE problem. Both the Camaro and LaCrosse were put into production after GM's resettlement with the Government and the UAW.

Agreed. NOTHING could be as bad as the way Roger Smith ran the company in the 1980s.....even Obama trying to dictate things. Roger Smith was a character, and little or no concern for quality control, as long as the company was making money. Even as a terrible manager, though, he does deserve credit, though, for one thing......approving the start of the Saturn Division.

mmarshall

From what I've heard, it an electrical problem where, when the front doors are opened, the dash/door wiring goes haywire and all the dash lights go on and off like a Christmas tree.

CDNROCKIES

I don't see this as necessarily a negative if GM and the UAW had handled correctly. I think we can agree that they carried too much dead weight prior to the restructuring. If they had trimmed only their weaker, unproductive employees and retained the best and the brightest they should still be able to improve their operations. Isn't that the whole point of the restructure?

Further, management should have reconsider their priorities and quality control should have been moved to the top or near the top of that list. The fact that GM has been given a second chance, on the tax payers dime, dicatates that they must make huge changes and greatly improve their efficiency, productivity and quality.

Good review of the M3 last year. But that was a first year model that you were reviewing. They've gone on to have even more issues with lag and DCT that have been improved/corrected in subsequent models.

My point is exactly that they came in to production after the restructure. GM should have done whatever they had to to improve their quality controls and bring to market an above average product.

I am not anti-GM. I have owned several and loved some of them. What I do have a fundamental issue with is the government handing out billions of dollars to a company that seems unable or unwilling to make the necessary improvements to sustain long term viability.

If I, or any other small business owner, some how miraculously were to receive a loan or bail out for our companies the expectation would be that we could identify our shortcomings and improve them....or face the end of our businesses. Why is GM any different?

I have never disagreed that Saturn didn't have potential. Seems like their demise is just one further example of GM's ineptness and poor decision making.

IS-SV

Yes I remember. The key to the infrequent snafu is how the customer is treated when rectifying the problem.

There is still no excuse for junk in first year launches in the modern era. And Toyota and Lexus have set the standard for a high percentage of successful first year launches, with other companies now are trying to follow the lead. Even Mercedes (with it's recent history of several years of poor reliability) successfully launched the all-new 2008 C-class without a significant hitch. It's simply expected today.