Now there's something you don't read everyday :)

News from the Great White North.


CAW Approves Camaro Changes
http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto_News/Auto_News/CAW_Approves_Camaro_Changes.S175.A10137.html
Plant rules will enable Canadian factories to build Zetas, including Camaro.
by Joseph Szczesny (2006-03-13)

As an owner of a 2000 Camaro that my wife and I bought new for her, a new Camaro should have been ready for the 2003 model year, not the 2010 model year. Once again, GM arrives at the party after everyone has gone home...

The Mustang is dominating that segment and GM is left with nothing to compete with. At least Ford has a good looking muscle car to at least draw people to notice Ford (and Ford's other products) if nothing else. The only car GM had to go up against the Mustang is the GTO and that was priced way out of line for the customers that lusted after it...all 6 customers that bought GTO's.

I too was in to the Buick dealership back in 2005 after Buick sent me an invitation to drive the then new LaCrosse in exchange for a $100 hotel voucher (that I needed and used). I was somewhat interested in this new Buick that was marketed toward a mid 30's male with kids.

What a disappointment. It was like driving a sofa on wheels and was definitely geared towards the 60 something crowd verses people my age. Seats were like Grandma's worn out recliner and the handling was remenicent of a motor boat I once piloted on a local lake. The ancient underpinnings dating back to the '90's really made themselves known on my short test drive. The 3800 V6 (what series are they on now with this thing? Series XXIV??) was a great motor in 1986, but it's hopelessly outdated with it's pushrod rattling and lack of refinement. Anything over 2500 rpms and it's just thrashing around.

I could have gotten a base car for under $20k with everything I needed on it, but spending another $3000 on a base Accord with a 4 cylinder would be the better bet.

A lot of GM's problems comes from just plain poor product. Most of the cars they produce might be getting better in reliability, but they are boring, depreciate extremely quickly and are too old school to compete with today's Japanese cars. They just can't get the entire package together like the Japanese (and even Chrysler) can.

Just my $.02.

Jay

It is a nice car --- but the friggin' grill.......EGADS MAN. WTF?

When GM says things like "just around the corner with our new models" and "we'll be back up at 25% share in a few years" , it's just meaningless now. Take Hyundai. With absolutely no history and coming to the U.S. market with the biggest piece of crap in 1986, they have completely shot right past GM in the last twenty years (at least as far as a car that I might buy). This is a company that had none of the heritage or history that GM has and are now going up against the Accord and Camry.

Okay, maybe those things were said ten years ago but the buying public stopped listening.

I love how they are advertising themselves as the world's most popular car company. That's because they spent the summer giving away cars. There's a lot of problems facing GM, such as their insane payroll and pensions thanks to our wonderful unions, but #1 is crappy product. Everybody always says, "but they're improving". Yeah, so are the Japanese, and Koreans, and Germans, and........ Worst of all are the Koreans, now that Kia and Hyundai have surpassed GM in quality, but for the same or less price, I'm amazed anybody buys Cobalts, Aveos, etc. Why can't they open their eyes?

Kia and Hyundai came to America with horrible product, remember the Hyundais that caught fire? In a short period of time they have gone from that to near Japanese levels of quality and reliability, all while keeping their prices competitive. As such, their cars have become more and more successful. It's not marketing or employee pricing, it's product. Someday GM will realize that the American public isn't as stupid as they think, not everybody takes their advertising at face value. You make inferior product, you will fail, that's the way business is. I don't care if they're improving or not, until they are as good or better than the rest of the world, I won't be on their sales lot.

GM and Ford (and the US economy) are going to be in a world of hurt when the Chinese bring in these cars they are building that have been reported to have initial high build quality.

Imagine in 10 years what GM and Ford (and probably the Germans) will be scrambling to do if you can buy a 4 door sedan that has the quality of a Camry or Accord that costs about 40% less than a comparable domestic sedan?

I do feel the executives that are running GM are out of touch with what the buying public is wanting in cars. They might be so sheltered from the lifestyle that the majority of us live in and don't have a clue as to what we want out of a minivan, family sedan or small car. These new Pontiac, Buick and Chevy sedans/minivans/small cars just never seem to have all aspects of the vehicle well executed and are ALWAYS behind the Camry and Accord in at least 1 or 2 major aspects.

What's up with these vehicles?

SSR = overweight, overpriced, no manual at first, limited capabilities, dismissed as a truck, dismissed as a sports car = no sales and cancelled for next year.

GTO = overweight, way overpriced, no styling = no sales and cancelled next year.

How much R&D did these two cars cost GM and I'd love to see how much in the red those two product lines ran.

Solstice = looks exceptional in person verses pics, seems to handle well, but: crap 4 cylinder, misleading pricing, delayed introduction for awhile, limited production and you couldn't even get one if you wanted one for awhile.

GM and Ford are the last of a dying breed. Companies that provide a retirement plan are old-fashioned.

Why would one even consider the Buick when the Charger is out there?

The union mandated wages, benefits and pensions that they pay are simply obscene. Nothing against a guy making a decent wage, but when assembly line workers are making $30 or $40 an hour, with full benefits and a pension when they retire, there's something wrong. Many white collar workers with advanced degrees would kill for the wages and benefits that Ford and GM pay. Some may call that admirable, but when the company is failing I call it stupid. What they get is far beyond good pay.

Hey, go to your local SAAB dealer! It's made by GM, cost less than 40k and it has both navigator and turbocharger! ;)

ARRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!

This just kills me. The Solstice is yet ANOTHER chance for them to sell a boat load of cars. But low and behold, they have production delays, and the f*cking thing won't even be on the lots in a numbers until OCTOBER! Who is looking for little convertables in god damn October!?!?!? Meanwhile Mazda quietly sells another gazillion Miatas.....

I think some of you have hit on the core of the problem.

GM still thinks they are the #1 car company. They still operate like they are some gold standard. They don't understand that NO ONE IS LISTENING ANYMORE.

They need to start scraping for market share like KIA and Huydai. They need to take apart a Camary, and build a car that is better. And DON'T release another f*cking car until it is. The constant game of catchup is pathetic.

UAW pay is indeed beyond reasonable........it amounts to ENTITLEMENT.
Entitlement wages will kill GM.

Mazda decides there is a market for a two-seat sports car.
Result? Thousands of Miatas sold.

Mercury decides there is a market for a two-seat sports car.
The result? Capri. Let's call it the Crappy.

Pontiac decides there is a market for a two-seat sports car.
The result? Fiero. Let's just call that one the Fiasco.

What the US car companies missed was simply that the purpose of a sports car is nothing more than fun. Fun to drive. A great experience every time behind the wheel.

On paper, the Mercury dealer could point out all the advantages of their front wheel drive Capri over the Miata. But it was a bore to drive. I don't care that it would be better in snow. Or has more interior room.

Every time I drive a Miata it puts a stupid grin on my face.

hopefully, the Solstice will not share the Fiero's fate. By the time they got the bugs worked out of it, and put a decent 6-cylinder engine in it, the reputation had already doomed the car to failure.

I hope GM does well, but have a hard time thinking that will happen anytime soon.

I think it was Bob Lutz who said " There is no problem a car company cannot fix with good product". I hope he has a few more tricks up his sleeve.

You can be right that some of the cars are behind the competition. But do YOU aspire to own a Camry?

The Camry is the most mediocre car ever built. Take off the rose-colored glasses, the interior is NOT what you see in it. For crying out loud, the outgoing V6 makes less power than a GM pushrod engine, while the Camry comes in last on gas mileage. Don't give "pushrod rattle" - think about what a pushrod is, what it does, and tell me if it's in any position to rattle, and if you could hear a rattle in 1/60 of a second's duration. If you want to say the valvetrain characteristics influence the tone of the engine, fine - but there's no "pushrod rattle," just like there's no pushrod rattle in the fairly refined Vette that just passed you. My aunt's Oldsmobile was more refined at idle than my dad's same-age Volvo- at least the Olds engine never shook the entire car. I also remember the engine never straining to move the car around town with the low-end torque, the Volvo tends to need a stab at the gas pedal, maybe a downshift. Then the ruckus begins.

Toyota only recently realized that their engine offered no significant advantage, and now they've built an engine that gets a whopping 8 hp more than GM's OHC V6 available in the LaCrosse. I'm sure GM left it a little low, and would have no problem upping the ante. Don't forget that the Japanese also rate horsepower on a different scale, and the SAE only recently tightened the procedure down. Did you notice the 10- 20 hp revisions recently?

What does the Camry do well? It goes. From A to B. Like any other car. You sit at a kitchen table, and your senses fall asleep. I'll give you this-the Camry engine is refined in that it doesn't transmit vibration, but it does buzz like a castrated vacuum cleaner. I've driven and valeted multiple Camries. I was unimpressed by the interior - it was no better in fit and finish than the Malibu. I'd easily buy a late model Jetta over both of them, although VW scored big with the redesign in the silhouette of an overweight Corolla. :rolleyes:

Maybe the Lexus is a nicer car, but from what I've seen, Toyota-badged cars skate by on reputation, media idolization, and some reliability - they are not cars that evoke a reaction of "nice." No experience with the trucks, so I'm not commenting there.

I'm not especially biased towards domestics. Given equal cars (like the Camry and Malibu), I'd buy the Malibu simply because the profits stay here. I just said I'd lean towards a Jetta if I were shopping in this price range-the other snoozemobiles don't offer a standard. But I see no reason why domestics always have to strive and beat imports, not just be as good. Frankly, all companies should have to work equally hard to impress the consumer.

Um, you may not have noticed but there ARE NO PROFITS to stay here when GM sells a Malibu.

BTW, the Camry may be plain-jane but the new Malibu is ugly beyond all reason.

I caught that and never edited it. How does "proceeds" sound? In any case, the money isn't shipped out of the country, never to be seen again except on the balance sheets issued to Toyota shareholders.

I agree, the Malibu is ugly.

One of my favorite quotes is from former GM chief Bob Stempel:

"We're in business to make money, not cars."

Kind of explains why they're where they are.

Mmmmmmm.......seen the all new Camry?
The snooze factor has faded. Good reviews. Almost fun to drive.

1) Genuine question: how do you calculate/figure the "profit" or impact on economy when a "Japanese" car is built in America?

2) I realize that the majority of Americans just want a car that works--aesthetics be damned. In fact, there are plenty of Americans who don't want anything flashy. But it takes roughly the same amount of energy, engineering, and cost to build a pretty car, as it does a bland car, as it does an outright ugly car. The Camry is non-descript. The Malibu is ugly. And the Maxx is offendingly so. Why on earth GM thought that people would part with their hard-earned money to purchase a car as ugly as the Maxx is beyond me.

3) I haven't driven the LaCrosse, but my in-laws are diehard Buick owners (Century, LeSabre, Rendezvous). And they all drive just like how JayH describes. You don't drive the things, so much as shepherd them down the road.