To clarify, GM said that about assembly workers - everyone knows that dealer employees are going.

Some possible reasons why they might say that.

First, it could be a lie. (Naturally.)

Second, they may expect Saturn sales to be partly replaced by sales of other GM cars. Saturn cars were being produced on platforms shared w/ other GM products, in GM plants that could or do produce other GM cars.

Third, it is possible some of the layoffs at the assembly plants that produce Saturn have already been done. I think production already stopped on one or two of the three Saturn models, over the summer. In which case, the Penske deal might have allowed laid-off workers to be brought back, but no Penske deal might not result in new lay-offs.

I don't know what the answer(s) are but I doubt GM will have thousands of ex-Saturn workers sitting around doing nothing - for very long.

Liquid natural gas and propane do not produce many of the same types of pollutants that gasoline does, but they still produce "greenhouse gasses" so using it instead will still cause our planet to burn up in a ball of flames any minute now.

It also costs a little more than gasoline, and it is less efficient mpg wise. It also has the potential to be much more dangerous in a serious crash. Google BLEVE (boiling liquid expanding gas explosion). Pretty gnarly.

The only way it makes sense to use LPG pr propane instead of gasoline is if the government gives people our tax money to do it. In other words we'd all pay for it instead of them. That makes perfect sense.

And that from the greatest capitalist way of life....I just love it...

It may only take 15 manhours to assemble a car but it takes a whole bunch of hours to build all the components. I'd bet that's where the big labor costs are.

Are the people who make all the parts for cars (like seats, engines, headlight assemblies etc) UAW workers?
I don't know, that's why I'm asking.

What's the rest of the answer? My pie chart is getting cold.

It would be interesting if Ford ceased all production in North America, and concentrated its work in Europe, where it has a much better reputation.

If at all, I believe Ford (of Europe) is regarded nearly as well as BMW or Mercedes.

Ok, if it makes you feel better, blame the UAW.

But thinking people might also consider the cost of the car's components (just think about the cost of the high-tech batteries, and making them collision resistant) as well as amortized development costs.

But then, I'm thinking logically, not with knee-jerk emotionalism.

And there's nothing knee-jerk about the Prius being priced nearly $20K less, right? Just good 'ol American pragmatism and value.

The Volt is not the same as a Prius. Therefore, it is not priced the same as a Prius.
Volt's technology is significantly more advanced than a 2010 Prius, and should cost more.

Really? It's different and more advanced and therefore "should cost more?"

That's even more ridiculous.

I would think a turbocharged engine costs more than naturally aspirated, and that four wheel drive costs more than two wheel drive too.

Is that ridiculous?

The question is - will this thing sell at the price point where GM can actually make a profit?

I sometimes get the nagging feeling they talked up this car and this technology as some kind of "leap-frog" over the competition, and would pave the way for a new GM.

This may play out nice in front of a congressional committee when you are borrowing billion$ - but may not be dealing with reality.

The Japanese ain't building just Zeros anymore, and this may not be the next Corsair.

Depending on application (or lack thereof), yes, it is.

How about the next "Corvair?" :D

Sure, if your customers buy technology for the sake of technology. Lots of Prius don't have a clue how a hybrid drivetrain works, they just know that the car gets good MPG. Will Volt buyers pay DOUBLE because its cool engineering?

The operating cost, interior space & etc is probably the same for a Prius as for a Corolla.

I think people will pay a premium to "save the planet", be early adapters and otherwise look cool.

Apparently, Toyota is turning "Prius" into a sub-brand in order to capitalize on this hip factor.


Poor GM - I think they are going to turn this into another aluminum block vega or V-8 diesel Oldsmobile.

Typically no, they are not. There are some unions in the parts supply business, but they are not at UAW wages, far from it. And many have accepted roll-backs to compete with non-union producers.

In fact, a lot of parts are made by employees of 'temp agencies', pretty much the lowest cost labor out there.

A few idiots. But that's about it.

All along, this car should have been priced at the Prius' level. If that involved dumbed-down tech, so be it. Who cares as long as it works.

It's that kind of ego-maniacal thinking in the glass towers of GM that lead to it's downfall. What about considering "what the market will bear"? Never thought of that, eh?

Heck...the $40k price of admission is minor compared to insane depreciation rate that puppy will provide. I'm guessing a nice, low mileage 1 year old Volt will pull in about $19k...and after 2 years?...I'm betting on $8k. Just my guess. . .:rolleyes:

When Toyota's plug-in serial (not parallel) hybrid using lithium ion batteries comes out, then it had better be the same price ($20-25K) as the Prius.

Genius logic :rolleyes:

GM, BMW, and Honda have tried that route and people like you laughed at the attempts because they weren't 'real' hybrids, but they worked. So don't be hypocritical.

The only answer you'd be happy with would be to COPY the Prius and price it the same. Of course then you'd blast 'em for not coming up with anything new.

Maybe if Ford built it, or it was a diesel, you'd be happier