Fuel fears puncture US car sales

[KentState]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: GroundedSailor

Originally posted by: Zedtom
Fuel is the major factor, but public relations are important too.

I now own only foreign cars. I grew tired of going to GM dealerships and having service "advisors" tell me that certain expensive parts had to be replaced for safety reasons. I never have had employees at Toyota, Hyundai or Honda dealerships try to talk me into unnecessary repairs.

1. Ever heard of 'silent recalls'? Japanese car makers do that a lot.
2. You will find that Japanese cars have more parts to replace at major scheduled maintenance intervals.

The total cost of ownership of foreign cars over a period of 5 years is higher than domestic cars. Go to edmunds.com and do a comparison for yourself.

Oh stop with the BS

Over a 5 yr period a foriegn car will require nothing but some oil changes and gas while the American piece of crap has nearly every mechanical piece replaced.

Seriously, you can't call BS and then make a statement like an American car will need everything replaced over a 5 year period. Little wonder why you aren't taken seriously.

 

[piasabird]

Cars dont usually go downhill till they are 5 years old, so it is ideal to rebuy every 5 years if you can afford it.

I say buy what makes you happy. Many So-Called american cars are made in Mexico or Canada. How much of a car do you actually think is made in America?

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: Stunt
SUV's are what is keeping GM afloat...why would they bite the hand that feeds them?
Where GM and Ford need to focus is on their economy and high volume vehicles. Honda and Toyota have been very lean making sure they offer only a few products that don't overlap and continuously improve ideas that already work well. Civic today is mechanically very similar to models in the 80's and 90's, same with the Corolla. GM and Ford are effectively competing with cars with 20 years of perfection and intense attention.

I bet GM has 20 times the number of models as Toyota and are still getting beat...If I were GM, I'd kill saturn, GMC, chevy cars, buick, hummer, subaru and saab. Chevy Trucks, Pontiac and Caddy only. This way they can focus on what people really want and don't have all these odd brands nobody buys.

I see plenty of Subarus and Saabs running around. But yes, everything else needs to go. Hummer 1, 2 and 3 are rarely bought and could probably disappear. (With the exception of govt. contracts of course.)

Such a shame that Buick has gone down to almost nil. They used to be THE car to have.

As for GroundedSailors' comment: I am afraid I cant agree with you, sir. My 2002 Mazda has only had one item replaced and it was taken care of (completely) by the warranty, which still lasts for another few years.
The manual tells me to change oil every 5000 miles, and for 55000 miles its been working great.
Up until the recent gas price increase, I was spending $30 every three weeks to run that thing.

If you want, I can write up a little cost analysis and show everybody exactly what that thing has cost me for the last 5 years.
Anybody?
Anybody?
Bueller?
Anybody?

 

[lowfatbaconboy]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Originally posted by: Stunt
SUV's are what is keeping GM afloat...why would they bite the hand that feeds them?
Where GM and Ford need to focus is on their economy and high volume vehicles. Honda and Toyota have been very lean making sure they offer only a few products that don't overlap and continuously improve ideas that already work well. Civic today is mechanically very similar to models in the 80's and 90's, same with the Corolla. GM and Ford are effectively competing with cars with 20 years of perfection and intense attention.

I bet GM has 20 times the number of models as Toyota and are still getting beat...If I were GM, I'd kill saturn, GMC, chevy cars, buick, hummer, subaru and saab. Chevy Trucks, Pontiac and Caddy only. This way they can focus on what people really want and don't have all these odd brands nobody buys.

The bolded section is an astute observation . . . ie fill most of a customers needs NOT all of their wants.

But I doubt there's much that is mechanically similar between a 1986 Civic and the 2006 variety. You are on the right track about the difference in philosophy. Japan Inc started making good small cars decades ago . . . and have progressively made them better . . . while adding larger (and different types) of vehicles to the mix. In the meantime, our Bizarro World car companies basically made one bad car after another (with rare exceptions like the first Taurus and 2ndGen+ Focus).

The intriguing aspects about GM selling its Subaru:
1) the WRX was the BEST small car in the family . . . notwithstanding GM's attempt to make a Saab out of one
2) Foresters and Outbacks have almost "cultish" followings in the NE and NW.
3) Killing Saturn (which has a bunch of duplicate GM products) would have made A LOT more sense than dumping Subaru's stable of relatively novel products

GMC probably makes mad margins . . . I imagine the same is true for Hummer but I bet both those brands are going to take it on the chin over the next few years. On the otherhand, it's possible GMC could gain sales by stealing marketshare from the upper end at Ford and Dodge, while the H2/H3 don't really have competitors.

Buick (and/or Pontiac) should have been killed off two years ago but now Buick has a couple of interesting cars and Pontiac has the Solstice . . . which is eating the Miata's lunch . . . after the supercharged version arrives (and Pontiac refines handling/interior) . . . Pontiac might eat into other roadsters like the S2000, Z4, etc.

GM and Ford are just poorly managed companies . . . have been for years.

In Colorado, Subaru is not so much a cult following as a necessity to get up hills in snow.
Subaru sells tons of cars in cold and snowy areas. I personally think they would be shooting themselves in the foot if they got rid of subaru.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

^^ Too late . . . but truth be told . . . GM bailed on its Subaru stake due to money issues.

I certainly agree with you that some people actually NEED AWD. But strategic thinking just isn't a valued characteristic at GM. The first year of the new GTO they shipped a ton of cars to the midwest and northeast . . . in the fall!