Utah Auto Repair Shops

UT Car Consumer Discussions

The New GM

by boomchek on Mon Dec 01 13:52:16 PST 2008

If I were in charge of GM here would be my plan: First and foremost eliminate as much rebadging as possible. There would be very few identical products sold under different names. In my opinion it's just a waste of money producing and marketing such duplicate vehicles with different names. Get rid of Hummer. Even if Hummers get developed into decent and affordable offroaders, the name still has that anti-environment stigma attached to it that might take years of losses to overcome. As for Saab, as Shifty said, sell it, or raffle it off if necessary. Keep GMC Truck division only for heavy duty commercial products, but not for selling light trucks and SUVs. Instead all light duty trucks wold be sold under the Chevy name. SATURN Make Saturn into GM's exclusive importer of foreign products such as the Opel and Vauxhall lineup from Europe, Holden vehicles from Australia. Astra: keep it as is Aura: replace it with a mid size European import from Opel Sky: keep it as is Vue: keep it as is Outlook: axe it as it would be sold under Chevy anyways New Saturn models: Saturn Ute, which is the Holden Ute car based pickup. Price it starting at under $20k. Saturn G8, sold currently under Pontiac but now would be sold under Saturn. European "cargo cars" , basically tiny vans based on current cars such as Astravan and Combo. BUICK As someone pointed out early, get rid of the brand's geriatric image. I'd make it into GMs power and style division. This would mean vehicles with mega horsepower, bold styling, and heritage. Lacrosse: axe it as it intrudes onto the Lucerne's price range and size Lucerne: keep it as an entry level Buick sedan Enclave: keep it only in it's most potent and loaded form (leather with all bells and whistles) New Buick models: Grand National: RWD coupe based off the G8 sedan platform Special or Super: make it Buick's halo car, a full size 4 door convertible sedan, similar in style to the Chrysler Phaeton concept of the 90s but with updated looks and technology. Also make a 2 door convertible version of the car. CADILLAC CTS: keep it as is but add a CTS wagon, convertible, and a coupe to compete head on with BMW 3 series and MB C Class STS: keep it as is but style it slightly differently so it doesn't look almost like a CTS, and also add a wagon to the mix DTS: rename it to a Fleetwood or Deville Concours (or other glitzy name it deserves), give it a RWD platform, and as many mentioned before, make it the best that it can be so it can compete with the likes of the MB S class, Lexus LH, and BMW 7 series. Spare no expenses and make it the standard of the world again. Make it more reliable than German counterparts and maybe you can win over some MB and BMW buyers. XLR: Axe it SRX, Escalade, Escalade ESV: keep as is. Escalade EXT: axe it, as it's almost the same as an Avalanche PONTIAC Get rid of the entire division. Waves are sold under the Aveo name which would be replaced anyways. The G5s are rebadges Cobalts. Move the Vibe to the Chevy lineup. G6 sedan, coupe, and convertible, as nice as they look axe them as they overlap into other similar products and price ranges. Axe the Solstice as it's the same as the Sky. Axe the Gran Prix too. CHEVROLET Make Chevy the bread and butter lineup ranging from the most affordable car in America to the quickest (Corvette). Aveo: axe it, after it's replaced by new Chevy Beat Cobalt: update it until a suitable replacement to be brought to market asap HHR: axe it Malibu: keep it Impala: make it into an affordable fun RWD sedan once again Corvette: keep it Equinox: axe it Traverse: keep it but make it in twot wheelbase lengths to replace the Equinox Tahoe: axe it Suburban: keep it but make it in two wheelbase lengths to replace the Tahoe Colorado: keep it but offer a base $15k model with a 4 cylinder motor. Silverado: keep it Avalanche: keep it Express: keep it New Chevy models: Chevy Beat: fast track it's development so it can be borught to the market faster, price it at starting at under $12k. Chevy Vibe: trnafer over from Pontiac's division Chevy Volt: bring onto ther market as scheduled Within 5 years offer the Volt powertrain on most small and mid size Chevies, just like hybrid powertrains are becoming a common option today. Summary of casualties: Saab lineup Pontiac lineup (excpet the Vibe) GMC Light duty trucks Buick Lacrosse Saturn Outlook Chevy Aveo Chevy HHR Chevy Equinox Chevy Tahoe Cadillac Escalade EXT Cadillac XLR As for the dealer network, it would go through some reorganization, and some smaller ones will be bought out, other will get revised brand to sell: Dealer networks would be divided into Buick/Cadillac (GM's luxury vehicles); Chevy only dealers since now the lineup is big enough; and Saturn only dealers since the lineup is large enough as well. The sale of Saab wouldn't hurt Saturn dealers as they'd have more imported stuff to sell now. The Buick, Pontiac, and GMC Truck dealers would lose 2 brand but gain better Buick lineup and Cadillac line, so that they can focus only on luxury. The Chevy Cadillac dealers would lose the Caddy franchise but gain a broader mainstream Chevy line.

Re: [steve_]

by WookieOnRit on Fri Nov 28 07:45:17 PST 2008

Steve, I too am looking at the '09 GV. The primary reason is that Suzuki finally matched its handsome looks with some real performance (fuel efficiency, off-road capability, superb handling, reduced road/engine noise, power, and best-in-class towing capacity). What I've always loved about Suzukis is the endless supply of standard features that at base levels are far superior to their competitors. Dollar for Dollar, they are a premium value (where VWs are not). What has always set Suzuki back is uncompetitive engines and mediocre performance. With the updated engines and transmissions, the GV has gone from a back of the pack performer, to a class front runner. Why am I looking at a GV? It's for a few reasons... 1: Value - Best Value in class 2: Styling - It's the best looking SUV in this class both inside and out. The interior well designed and the exterior is rough and masculine. The interior in particular is well organized and they put in a sliding arm rest for the '09 model. Panel gaps are very tight and the interior materials are top notch for the class. It's a very handsome SUV. 3: Performance - Specifically, I am a outdoor person. I need something that can tow, go through rough terrain, and up steep inclines. The optional 4-Mode 4WD (not AWD) is of particular interest. What most people don't realize is that the GV is actually RWD and not FWD. As far as I know, it's the only one in its class with that distinction making it a more pleasing vehicle to drive. With the optional 4-Mode 4WD, the 4High mode keeps the vehicle in RWD while only putting power to the other wheels when needed that is excellent for every day service. Off road, you can put it two 4-Lock (Full-time 4WD) and 4-Lo (for rock crawling). This makes it better than every vehicle in its class. If you want better off-road capability, you are probably going to be driving a Jeep or Hummer (and those are more expensive). The V6 is also of particular interest to me, but that's because I'll be needing the additional towing capacity and if I'm not mistaken, provides a bigger radiator that is an asset no matter what driving conditions you're in. One of the biggest improvements to the GV is that the new V6 has 50 HP more than the outgoing V6 while achieving better fuel efficiency even with the 4WD. Quite excellent. Compared to the other vehicles in class with V6 options (or additional turbo'ed fours) they do not provide as much towing capacity and are more expensive than the GV. I believe the only vehicle in the class that you can get with better mileage numbers than the GV V6/Power is the Rav4. Dollar for Dollar, the GV is a better value than the Rav4 and overall less expensive with a better warranty. Combine all of that with the reduced noise and excellent handling of the RWD and you've got my attention. 4: Warranty - Excellent warranty. Better than most manufacturers. Overall that's why I'm interested. I want a rugged vehicle and not a cute-ute. To me, Rav4s, CR-Vs, Vues, Rogues, and Outlanders fit this mold. The only vehicle that really has my attention right now is the Forester, but for the additional power, you're going to paying much more than you would for a GV. Plus, Subaru uses AWD and not 4WD for the Forester limiting its ability on tough terrain. As I said, I camp, hike, rock climb, and kayak, so I need something that's going to get me to those destinations and perhaps beyond. To me, between the Forester and GV, the GV has more prowess for adventure based on everything that the vehicle offers both for the price and based on its performance. When my house sells, I will be probably upgrading to the GV from my '93 Grand Cherokee. As for your concerns for the wife to get her interested in the GV. Women in general care about the interior of a car more than anything. I find their exterior tastes to be rather dubious and erratic. Women care about safety, interior feel/design, and noise. The reduced noise on the GV with the handsome interior should be the selling point. Combine that with superior standard safety features (ALB, ESP, Every kind of airbag, increased structural rigidity for '09) and you should get some interest. It's a handsome vehicle to be sure, but I understand it's not for everyone. If none of that gets her, than don't bother. I'd almost say don't even try if she's only going to be commuting from point A to point B. Most women don't like RWD cars anyway and would never appreciate the superior nature of RWD to FWD or 4WD to AWD. To me, I find the GV to be a better value and the better vehicle. Good luck with your choice and I hope I gave you some insight to why someone would be interested in the Grand Vitara.

???

by scottl on Sun Nov 23 16:48:52 PST 2008

Either Edmund's car was screwed up, or they don't know how to drive. I just returned an '08 LS Auto 2.2 Cobalt Coupe that I had rented and drove 800 miles. I flogged the heck out of the car, including 400 miles at over 80mph on I-70 in western CO and UT, and I got 34mpg. Actual measurement, not using the on dash display. I am for the most part a foreign car guy, but I was very impressed by the Cobalt. If GM could get the cheesiness out of the hard plastic on the dash, and give it some seats worth sitting in, this would be a viable alternative. Especially if they come into the 21st Century and put actual brakes on the rear axle. So close, and yet so far.

2009 TCH picking up on 11/17/08

by nighshft on Thu Nov 13 17:51:13 PST 2008

Ordered mine by phone 2 months ago - got it fully loaded, ( Nav, satelite radio etc...) from Competition Toyota, Long Island NY. included will be P2( wanted Sirius not XM satelite and got it) GO BM SR LA UT CQ did not buy the floor mats, (can do better) price31,649.00 I was happy with it - looked for several months, beat up a lot of salespeople....no one was able to match this

Re: my take [62vetteefp]

by anythngbutgm on Mon Nov 10 13:53:27 PST 2008

I can name a few very recent efforts that GM could've saved money on. - How many Lambda utes do you need? Was the Traverse necessary? - Did Saab really need to invest the time, the marketing, the engineering into the "Black" series (or whatever goofy lingo they want to call it) only to sell a total of 1500 copies? Does Saab need to exist at all? The brand is about as healthy as Isuzu was. Cutting them loose would save a lot of investment dollars IMO. - How about the engineering it took to add V8 option to the Colorado and Canyon pickups? Why? They were beyond pathetic when they came out and with the hint of 4+ dollar gas, a V8 is the last thing I would've thought they needed to generate sales. How about instead, using that cake to start from scratch? How about NOT letting them wither on the vine for a 10 year life cycle? What a waste. Even piddly little things like the little "GM" badges that go on every vehicle, those don't seem to have made much of an impact?

Lead Feet at Edmunds?

by micweb on Fri Nov 07 09:17:44 PST 2008

I owned a 2006 Cobalt 5 speed coupe and got 35 mpg with in on highway trips, and 33 mpg on my mostly freeway commute. It only had one defect: a rattle in the dash. I just traded in a 2008 Honda Fit on a 2009 Cobalt Sedan LS, auto transmission, ABS & protection package & spare tire. I got $1500 off in rebates, $600 off from the dealer, and $1,000 off from my GM Card. Discounts on Cobalts are now once again easy to find (for a while they were scarce due to the resurgent interest in small cars). So compared to other small cars (with the exception of the Focus) I think the Cobalt IS less expensive. I have put three tanks of gas through the new Cobalt, and have an overall average of 31.5 mpg with the automatic. Based on the mileage you are reporting, I think your test drivers are having fun with the great acceleration potential of the upgraded 2.2 engine. I'd like to see you run your test sample down to empty, refill and reset the mpg calculator, put an old-timer in it and have them drive a long freeway trip keeping the speed under 70. I think you would see more like 33-35 mpg. I got 35 mpg on my "country road" drives to Yosemite on my old Cobalt 5 speed. I'll take your word for it that the car has dicey handling at the limits. In my experience driving at "normal" aggressive urban speeds, my new Cobalt handles on ramp sweeps with more aplomb than the Fit or my other current driver, a Nissan Versa (6 speed). The tires don't seem anywhere near their limits when I take on and offramp sweeps fast, I don't notice any issues on street cornering or any squeal in parking structures. You mentioned that you have the Contis on your sample, same as on my non-XFE (since mine is an auto). These Contis are very quiet, very smooth, and as I said seem to have plenty of grip. Mind you, I'm pretty fussy, I often swap out stock tires on economy cars for Falken Ziex 512's or Kumho KH16's, but when I did this on my former Cobalt (I used the Falkens in that case) I noticed no improvement in handling, but an increase in tire noise from pavement. I disagree with your love of power windows, door locks, and mirrors. Ok, I agree with you that mirrors should all be power operated these days, to allow adjustment on the freeway and to allow swapping drivers (some drivers might ignore the adjustment, and that creates a safety issue). BUT AT LEAST the mirrors on the Cobalt are in "fixed"housings - the manual mirrors on my Echo adjusted as complete unit (hosing moved too) so they got knocked out of wack at the car wash, a real annoyance. On my former Caliber, the manual mirrors had no inside adjustment level, so you had to roll down the windows. On my former Focus, the adjustment levers were so large they got knocked out of alignment when the car wash people cleaner the interior. At least on the Cobalt, the levers are small and out of the way. Keep in mind, spoiled generation, that most of these cars are driven by ONE driver consistently and once you set the mirrors you can pretty much forget about them for months if not years. On the issue of power windows and door locks, once again, this is principally a commuter car. A single mom reduced to compact car status instead of a minivan or sport ute might not like having to manually open each door, but let me tell you, as a parent, I like it this way. Manual door locks and manual windows are reassuringly simple - easy to operate and easy to fix. No kid ever got strangled by a malfunctioning manual window. No one in an irrigation ditch ever had a problem opening a manual vs. power window. As for the door locks. I just reach across to open the rear far door so I can get my gym bag out of the back. On the Fit, I had to go through a cumbersome routine (I had power locks but no remote) to lock the drivers door but have the far door open. How about that high lip on the trunk? Like it. The floor is low relative to the lip, so when I throw my gym bag in there, it's not easy for street people to see if there was other stuff in there. On the Fit, I didn't feel safe opening the trunk at destination, either going into the gym or coming back, because the flat floor gave an easy line of sight into everything stored back there. You did nail the ride, and I think it has improved since my 2006, that or coming off the Fit and Versa I appreciate the great engineering that goes into the Cobalt. Yes, it rides like my old 2006 Impala, and that is a good thing. It's also an order of magnitude quieter than the Versa and two orders of magnitude quieter than the Fit. This is a car I could drive from SF to LA without excessive fatigue. So what are the faults you find? Biggest are the tires, easy to correct with $50 tires from Tire Rack. Next, the handling at extremes. Easy to fix with a sway bar kit from Eibach through Tire Rack. The have Hawk HPS street performance brake pads, too. Speed control? Rostra makes an aftermarket unit, and since the actual cruise control chores are handled by the ECM via the drive by wire throttle, no mechanical mods to worry about (the Rostra unit doesn't even require wiring on the cabin control unit, it uses a transponder). I am debating whether to pick up an XFE Coupe as a "sleeper" sports car. The Coupe is nice looking. But the sedan would work, too. Install from Michelin Pilot Exalto A/S tires on it (more costly than the Falkens and Kumho's I mentioned, but top rated); install the Eibach sway bars; install the Hawk HPS pads. Less than $1,000 to take full advantage of that wonderful engine and 5 speed. (If you want to go further than this, just pull the VIN for an SS off the web and swap in the struts and springs and shocks - OEM parts, even from the performance models, are wonderfully cheap). I can't believe the performance oriented world of the '60's and 70's has morphed into the anti-functional bling world of the new millenium, where its more important to have a noisy muffler than doesn't really improve power, a noisy cold air intake that hardly improves power, extreme harsh lowering springs (Eibachs come to mind, yes I tried a set twice and hated them both times), and wide ultra low profile tires, than to smartly upgrade a car like the XFE to take advantage of its potential. Yeah, I believe nothing more than tires would change its character as a daily driver, the sway bars would make it a fun canyon carver. And still preserve its utility as a commuter. What are the RPM on the XFE now that Chevy has dropped the final ratio? My 2006 had much higher RPM than my 2009 auto version. I'd like to see the engine load on the highway, I'm not averse to downshifting to 4th or even 3rd for quick passing power....