The New GM

[MBrown]

So I have been looking at what GM wants to do with the new GM. Of course they want to focus on four brands at least for the American Market, Chevy, GMC, Buick Cadillac. I was looking at what these brand's current and future vehicle linesups were. I must say it looks quite promising.

Chevy will be GM's main brand obiously. They already have the outstanding Malibu. They will be replacing the Cobalt with the Cruze which looks great inside and out and there seems to be a replacment for the aveo on the way. Also the new Equinox is coming out which looks great, and Camaro and Volt. Their trucks are fine. The only problem I see is the Impala. And we havent seen any spy shots are anything that would be a next gen Impala. I would say Chevy is looking quite good for the future.

GMC. I didn't quite understand why they still want to keep GMC. After some thought I am starting to see why they are keeping it. I guess its just simply going to be more upscale version of Chevy trucks and SUVs (am I correct here?) which I am fine with.

Buick. At first I was saying to my self why is there a need for two luxury brands? I can now see GM's thinking behind having Buick compete against Lexus and the Japanese luxury brands and Cadillac against the German luxury brands. Looking at the new Buick LaCrosse, this looks like its more about luxury and confort than luxury and performance and it just looks more...Japanese. I am curious to see what they are going to do about the lucerne. Are they going to replace it with the regal?

Cadillac. Luxury + Permance. The CTS and STS are both RWD and come with AWD. They are both fine execpt the STS's interior looks a bit dated but whatever. They need to do something with the DTS. Its FWD right? The Cadillac sedans sould all be at least RWD. The Escalades? I am fine with them. People still buy them.

I think GM will be able to get through this nightmare just fine. Most of their vehicles that are or will be coming out look to be very competitive. I don't understand why some people want GM to "die" or they think they are doomed forever. Are my thoughts correct or do I just don't know what I am talking about. Please dissect and cruitique my thoughts.

 

[Bignate603]

GM has some winners and losers in their lineup. Most of the models that have had a complete redesign in the last few years are competitive. Their engineering has been moving in the right direction. Even with decent cars though they still have quite a few business issues that will be very tough to overcome. We'll have to see how it all works out.

 

[TehMac]

The Cruze is just a sedan version of the Cobalt I thought. The Cobalt should stay, be given a more inspiring name, given RWD, some sort of turbo'd 4 or 6, and made a little fuckin' prettier.

That way, when people come in and see the Camaro and corvete, they can get the new Cobalt, and feel happy.

The Cobalt has all the right ingredients for being a sucessful performance brand ala the Subaru WRXs, but no one at GM seems to understand this.

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: TehMac
The Cruze is just a sedan version of the Cobalt I thought. The Cobalt should stay, be given a more inspiring name, given RWD, some sort of turbo'd 4 or 6, and made a little fuckin' prettier.

That way, when people come in and see the Camaro and corvete, they can get the new Cobalt, and feel happy.

The Cobalt has all the right ingredients for being a sucessful performance brand ala the Subaru WRXs, but no one at GM seems to understand this.

Not really. They're using a brand new platform (Delta II as opposed to the original Delta) for the Cruze as compared to the Cobalt. This is a completely new design. Also, there's already a sedan version of the cobalt.

 

[TehMac]

Oh.

Why call it the cruze though? Sounds unexciting.

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: TehMac
Oh.

Why call it the cruze though? Sounds unexciting.

Eh, it's not too bad. So far the reviews have been ok for it and I think it looks better than the cobalt. If it can deliver something that hits its target as well as the Malibu or CTS did they should have a viable competitor.

 

[overst33r]

The 1.4T DI engine in the Cruze is going to be a gem.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

The Lucern will rot on the vine until it's eventually dropped. They were originally going to replace it with a RWD car based on the zeta platform that was canceled some time ago.

The Regal will likely be rebadged version of the current Opel Insignia, like they did in China. It's the same platform as the new Lacrosse (epsilon II), but on the short-wheelbase version, so it'll be about 6-8 inches shorter.

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: TehMac
The Cruze is just a sedan version of the Cobalt I thought. The Cobalt should stay, be given a more inspiring name, given RWD, some sort of turbo'd 4 or 6, and made a little fuckin' prettier.

That way, when people come in and see the Camaro and corvete, they can get the new Cobalt, and feel happy.

The Cobalt has all the right ingredients for being a sucessful performance brand ala the Subaru WRXs, but no one at GM seems to understand this.

Not really. They're using a brand new platform (Delta II as opposed to the original Delta) for the Cruze as compared to the Cobalt. This is a completely new design. Also, there's already a sedan version of the cobalt.

It's also a global vehicle. Other than a few drive train options, it's sold in numerous countries that way.

 

[zoiks]

Not sure why GM wants to keep Buick around.

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: zoiks
Not sure why GM wants to keep Buick around.

Globally they are one of their better money makers.

 

[zerocool84]

Originally posted by: TehMac
The Cobalt should stay, be given a more inspiring name, given RWD, some sort of turbo'd 4 or 6, and made a little fuckin' prettier.

Why would they make an econobox RWD??? That doesn't make sense. Making it look better, yes it needs it badly but the average person right now only cares about MPG, price, and brand image.

 

[vi edit]

I was doing some reading on GMC and I guess the reason they are around is because of industrial/commercial sales. I'm not talking rebadged Silverado's being sold as Sierras. That's just a showroom filler. It's the really big dump truck/tow truck/cargo vans/one step down from a semi sized trucks that make them a lot of money.

I guess Chevy doesn't really cater to that market and left it to GMC. That's why they are being spared the axe.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

GM is still too large imo. from the OP's interpretation, it looks like its still trying to compete with everyone in the world and has way too many models out. consider:
Honda: compact civic, midsized accord, fuel efficient car: insight, compact suv, midsized suv pilot, pickup ridgeline
acura: compact: tsx, midsized: TL, flagship: RL. compact suv: RDX, midsized suv: mdx

that lineup of about 11 vehicles total for the entire manufacturer is pretty good. the only thing i'd add is a sporty roadster (such as s2000)
it is easy to manage, overall is very fuel efficient w/o any big v8's and large suv's. honda could have made a larger suv, but i'm assuming it predicted the suv market falling off (as it did) and hence why it doesn't have any big gas guzzlers out right now. the only car i see that can use some improvement is the RL, but i guess they dont want to shoot the price up to compete w/ the 7 series/LS/S-class. that would be tough to compete it. the RL does pretty well for where its priced now.

Gm is trying to compete with the germans in the high end and i dont see that turning out well. the cts-v is stuffed with a big fat torqey engine that gives it a slight edge over the 5 year old m5. but what about the 3 series sedans? 5 series sedans? full size 7? pure sexy m6? those are all blanks from caddilac.

buick vs japanese luxury? infintity/acura/lexus are going to be damned tough competitors to beat out w/ buick as your man...

 

[Doggiedog]

I know absolutely no one who would cross shop a Buick against a Lexus.

 

[SickBeast]

IMO the Malibu and Impala are a large part of why GM went down.

I really like the Camaro, the Volt looks interesting, and the Corvette has always been an incredible car.

Their trucks are decent, and I like Cadillacs. Buicks are good reliable cars, but they need a makeover IMO. The Rendez Vous is a nice truck, but their cars are ugly IMO.

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
GM is still too large imo. from the OP's interpretation, it looks like its still trying to compete with everyone in the world and has way too many models out. consider:
Honda: compact civic, midsized accord, fuel efficient car: insight, compact suv, midsized suv pilot, pickup ridgeline
acura: compact: tsx, midsized: TL, flagship: RL. compact suv: RDX, midsized suv: mdx

that lineup of about 11 vehicles total for the entire manufacturer is pretty good. the only thing i'd add is a sporty roadster (such as s2000)
it is easy to manage, overall is very fuel efficient w/o any big v8's and large suv's. honda could have made a larger suv, but i'm assuming it predicted the suv market falling off (as it did) and hence why it doesn't have any big gas guzzlers out right now. the only car i see that can use some improvement is the RL, but i guess they dont want to shoot the price up to compete w/ the 7 series/LS/S-class. that would be tough to compete it. the RL does pretty well for where its priced now.

Gm is trying to compete with the germans in the high end and i dont see that turning out well. the cts-v is stuffed with a big fat torqey engine that gives it a slight edge over the 5 year old m5. but what about the 3 series sedans? 5 series sedans? full size 7? pure sexy m6? those are all blanks from caddilac.

buick vs japanese luxury? infintity/acura/lexus are going to be damned tough competitors to beat out w/ buick as your man...

And they also make the Fit, Odyssey and Element. The Accord is a full size sedan as of its current generation.

The RL also does pretty poorly. It's almost $50k to start and goes up a bit more with its options. It makes for a good used car though, as its resale is pretty low.

What about Toyota? You always seem ultra-defensive when people say they're overrated.

 

[MBrown]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
IMO the Malibu and Impala are a large part of why GM went down.

I really like the Camaro, the Volt looks interesting, and the Corvette has always been an incredible car.

Their trucks are decent, and I like Cadillacs. Buicks are good reliable cars, but they need a makeover IMO. The Rendez Vous is a nice truck, but their cars are ugly IMO.

Are you talking about the current Malibu or the older one?

 

[waffleironhead]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
IMO the Malibu and Impala are a large part of why GM went down.

I really like the Camaro, the Volt looks interesting, and the Corvette has always been an incredible car.

Their trucks are decent, and I like Cadillacs. Buicks are good reliable cars, but they need a makeover IMO. The Rendez Vous is a nice truck, but their cars are ugly IMO.

No, it was marketing the same exact car acress 4 different brands wiyh nothing different than some body panels and some interior tweaks. another was the 20 plus years of the cavalier. When your entry level car is`crappy, people tend not to stay with the brand when they want to upgrade. The maliba anb impala are doing fine.

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS

it is easy to manage, overall is very fuel efficient w/o any big v8's and large suv's. honda could have made a larger suv, but i'm assuming it predicted the suv market falling off (as it did) and hence why it doesn't have any big gas guzzlers out right now. the only car i see that can use some improvement is the RL, but i guess they dont want to shoot the price up to compete w/ the 7 series/LS/S-class. that would be tough to compete it. the RL does pretty well for where its priced now.

Not really. I don't think Honda had magical knowledge of what was going to happen, it was just aiming for a global market which cared more about fuel efficiency than the US did at the time. They understood their strengths were in unit body construction which doesn't lend itself to large SUVs and trucks. Those typically do better with a body on frame design which the American auto makers along with Toyota had significantly more experience doing. Honda did try to move into the small truck market with the unit body designed ridgeline which was a pretty resounding flop. After that sort of result from attempting a truck Honda decided to stay with what they knew.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Not really. I don't think Honda had magical knowledge of what was going to happen, it was just aiming for a global market which cared more about fuel efficiency than the US did.

looks like Honda had more magical powers thank Gm did. it succesfully predicted the market and didn't fuck up and suck at bring a car manufacturer than Gm did. honda isn't out of business, nor has any type of "negativity" in japan like Gm does at home.

nobody cared about fuel efficienty 5-10 years ago, which is why the SUV boomed. Gm just sucked and couldn't predict that people are going to stop buying suv's and gas guzzlers. look @ them: when gas was $4-$5 a gallon, they were researching and developing new v8 cars such as the camaro and the g8.

any car manf. could continue and make bigger and more powerful suv's such as gm's full sizers, but why didn't honda? they could have made a mediocre full sized suv based on the ridgeline, but they didn't. guess that had some kind of magical power that told them the future which is why they're not bankrupt and Gm is. face it, gm makes shitty cars. and if you drive one, you drive a shitty car

 

[zoiks]

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Not really. I don't think Honda had magical knowledge of what was going to happen, it was just aiming for a global market which cared more about fuel efficiency than the US did.

looks like Honda had more magical powers thank Gm did. it succesfully predicted the market and didn't fuck up and suck at bring a car manufacturer than Gm did. honda isn't out of business, nor has any type of "negativity" in japan like Gm does at home.

nobody cared about fuel efficienty 5-10 years ago, which is why the SUV boomed. Gm just sucked and couldn't predict that people are going to stop buying suv's and gas guzzlers. look @ them: when gas was $4-$5 a gallon, they were researching and developing new v8 cars such as the camaro and the g8.

any car manf. could continue and make bigger and more powerful suv's such as gm's full sizers, but why didn't honda? they could have made a mediocre full sized suv based on the ridgeline, but they didn't. guess that had some kind of magical power that told them the future which is why they're not bankrupt and Gm is. face it, gm makes shitty cars. and if you drive one, you drive a shitty car

Another moronic post. I gave up halfway.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Not really. I don't think Honda had magical knowledge of what was going to happen, it was just aiming for a global market which cared more about fuel efficiency than the US did.

looks like Honda had more magical powers thank Gm did. it succesfully predicted the market and didn't fuck up and suck at bring a car manufacturer than Gm did. honda isn't out of business, nor has any type of "negativity" in japan like Gm does at home.

nobody cared about fuel efficienty 5-10 years ago, which is why the SUV boomed. Gm just sucked and couldn't predict that people are going to stop buying suv's and gas guzzlers. look @ them: when gas was $4-$5 a gallon, they were researching and developing new v8 cars such as the camaro and the g8.

any car manf. could continue and make bigger and more powerful suv's such as gm's full sizers, but why didn't honda? they could have made a mediocre full sized suv based on the ridgeline, but they didn't. guess that had some kind of magical power that told them the future which is why they're not bankrupt and Gm is. face it, gm makes shitty cars. and if you drive one, you drive a shitty car

Question: Do you want this "new" GM to succeed or fail (and give reasons for your answer)?

(and for the record, Chrysler currently has the worst car lineup of any of the so called "domestic" 3, far more "shitty" than GM and that's coming from someone who bought the 3 Dodge's of the last 4 cars bought).

 

[boomerang]

The more of Lois' posts I read, the more I'm convinced he rides the short bus. He cannot control himself. He can start out a reply in a manner that's seemingly a normal response and then something takes over and he's back to the juvenile behavior.

He lives in the U.S., but his national pride runs too deep for him to ignore. The ethnicity he sees when he looks in the mirror outweighs everything.

Go home to the motherland Lois or at the very least stop acting like a 12 year old.

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
any car manf. could continue and make bigger and more powerful suv's such as gm's full sizers, but why didn't honda? they could have made a mediocre full sized suv based on the ridgeline, but they didn't.

Honda didn't try making a more truck like SUV because they couldn't move the ridgeline. People looking for trucks weren't even considering it and the sales were terrible. They found out they sucked at making trucks that people actually wanted so they just stuck with the cars and car based SUVs where they had more experience.

There was no special knowledge about gas prices, they just learned the hard way that almost no one wanted a Honda truck.

when gas was $4-$5 a gallon, they were researching and developing new v8 cars such as the camaro and the g8.

They have a 300 hp V6 Camaro that gets 29 mpg highway. Seems like their research and development paid off. They just had to add another shift at the Camaro factory because they can't make them fast enough. They wanted to make a car that people wanted, it seems like they pulled it off.

Also, the R&D on the G8 was minimal. The car was pretty much already made. They took a car from one of their branches in another country, changed the styling a bit, and brought it to the US. As far as development goes that cost them almost nothing.

face it, gm makes shitty cars. and if you drive one, you drive a shitty car

No offense, but I'll take the opinion of Motor Trend, Car and Driver, Edmunds, and the other car magazines over yours. You've got some sort of personal problem with American made cars that are pretty ridiculous. Did a Chevy beat you up as a kid?