Chevy Volt - $40,000 - Thanks UAW
 

Economy at any price. GM (Government Motors) doesn't have a chance if they're betting their union controlled asses on this. Heck...gas is 2 bucks a gallon. If it weren't a UAW built car, it would cost 30% less and might actually be competitive. It's almost hard to watch. Almost. . .

SmileWavy

Where did you verify a $40K MSRP?

Don't you end up getting like $6500 off the sticker because of government subsidies?

it takes a union plant 15 manhours to build a car. just because i'm not good at math, let's just say a UAW worker gets $100 per hour. that's $1500.
you really have a problem with what makes that car $38,500, not the $1500 it takes to assemble that car.

It takes me 45 seconds to install an $20,000 OEM targa top.

Should "UAW" really be the kneejerk answer for everything that is wrong with Detroit? They are the answer for a lot of it, but not all of it.

You forgot the cost of the retired UAW workers, and for every hour that ticks by, regardless of how many cars are built.

the cost of the retirees is built into that $100 per hour (i think it's closer to $70 per hour) with the guy on the line making less then $30. i think i read that toyota pays $60 per hour.

Hell, the chariman of GM, whickever one it was, said it would be close to $40,000. And it DOES NOT get 240 MPG.

It takes a few more than 1 person to build a car....

Every press release I've read projects a $40k price. No doubt that's not an exact number, but I doubt it will be $20k to compete with the Prius and Insight hybrids.

UAW is partially to blame, but you also have to wonder what management was thinking. It's essentially a $40k economy car. Cool technology, but worthless if consumers won't pay the price.

His math is man hours.

1 guy at $100 ph x's 15 hours = $1500

2 guys at $100 ph x's 7.5 hours each = $1500

3 guys at $100 ph x's 5 hours each = $1500

....

....

...

15 guys at at $100 ph x's 1 hour each = $1500

Hmmm... lemme think about it.... n..naa.... ee.... yep.. yes it is the answer.

Two of my best mates were engineers who got put on lines as non-UAW managers to ensure Joe-Bob was putting the cars together right. The UAW guys made every day of their lives their absolute hell, didn't follow instructions worth s***, and were making 2 times as much as my engineer friends were after benefits. And yet would always complain about every little thing, and not heed anything from my friends who were technically their superiors, but they weren't UAW managers, they were overseeing engineers, so they didn't get the time of day from the workers. Thus cars continued to roll off the line with tons and tons of problems.

Exactly. These UAW pricks hide behind the Union and get away with BS and robbing a company blind.

How about if you ran the generator part of it on propane instead of gasoline? Doesn't propane burn cleaner? There is lot of infrastructure for this in place, and we are sitting on a lot of it, relative to petroleum anyway.

Shedding the UAW would make GM and Chrysler competitive (assuming they don't ressurect the ghosts of idiot managers past - like from the 1970s). Without that, I doubt either company is really going to survive long-term. It's just prolonging the agony. FWIW I think eventually Ford will succumb to the realities of being undercut at every turn too. They've done a lot of things up to now, but eventually they too will be crushed by their staggering pension obligations. They're on borrowed time.

Fifteen hours is a bit low, I think 20 is more typical. Regardless, the UAW's argument that they could work for free and Ford/GM/Chrysler wouldn't be competitive has some merit.

The problems run much deeper.

Ford's liability for pensions is something like $43Bn and it has something like $37Bn in pension plan assets. That was as of end 2008, assuming they didn't bail out of their investments the plan liabilities and assets might be more or less matched now. Ford's liability for retiree medical is something like $17Bn owed to the VEBA trust, half of which Ford can pay in stock if it chooses. Ford's annual pension expense is roughly $1Bn. Ford's annual revenue (in 2008, not a banner year) was about $145Bn. So, looking at the relative size of these numbers, Ford doesn't seem to be saddled with unmanageable pension or medical obligations. If they make good cars that sell well and keep direct costs under control, Ford can make a heck of a lot of money. Well, the US auto market also needs to be better than 10MM units. Which it will be. Replacement rate is roughly 14MM.

Of course, it would be even better if Ford could jettison all of it's pension and medical liabilities, and dump those old people on Social Security and Medicare. I'd buy more stock. It's all about corporate profits, baby.

GM can do anything it wants to do. GM doesn't want to build electric cars, and has shown this in the past. GM is a very sick and bloated company. UAW may be part of that, but only a part. If we look back in time, Unions were only brought about as a reaction to abusive business practices. GM, unlike a lot of other companies, is still whack.

According to GM, Saturn is shutting down. Ok, but they said not a single layoff would result because of it. Do the math, 1 guy X 100 = $1500.00 producing something. 10,000 x $100 ====== millions and millions = producing nothing. I dont know where they are going to put them, because they have a oversupply now, both in cars and workers.

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