GMNA to Undergo Major Capacity Reduction

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Much of Toyota's money (from US market vehicles) goes into investing in the US, Canada, and Mexico. Just because the company is based in Japan doesn't mean all the money leaves the country. How many Toyota plants and R&D facilities and design facilities have been built in the past 15 years? How many new GM plants have opened in the same time frame? How many Toyota plants have CLOSED? How many GM plants have closed?

Where's GM's investment been in the past 10 years? Half of Saab....half of Daewoo...a few billion to Fiat...a few hundred million to Fuji....expansions in China...

[post="46158"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Well Hudson, I'm sure I don't need to bore you with this stuff but I'll bite just for the heck of it.

First, I think this is an argument that will increasingly be used against GM when Toyota starts getting scrutiny and I'll counter it with this; GM still employess more people here and contributes more to this economy than Toyota. Sure, Toyota is investing here, but they're not investing here just so they can employ americans, they're investing here because it makes them profit. So, that means most of the money is still going back to Japan because the goal of a business isn't to be a good citizen after all, it's to make money.

GM has contributed and is still contributing to our economy for close to 100 years now and while I'm glad Toyota is employing americans, I don't think that should be forgotten.

Secondly, GM has to sustain itself. thousands of Americans, you know the same americans that won't buy an american car, depend on the company for dividends, healthcare and pension. Therefore, to invest in america, a market in which GM has been in perpetual decline for 30 years and already has capacity issues in would be a VERY BAD business move. GM has done what it should've done and what any smart corporation would've done and taken what limited money it has and invested in growth areas such as China and Latin America. If GM were to invest in america which increasingly won't buy it's cars in the first place that'd be suicide. Not to mention that any facility GM build here would almost certainly include the costly and greedy UAW.

It's very unfair to point the finger at GM and say that they are reluctant to invest in america (Which is what some will do-trust me) when the coin has both sides. When american's start investing in american auto makers then american auto makers might start investing in america, given that capacity from a bygone era, the UAW, healthcare and all other unfair hinderances against these companies are addressed. Until then, onward to China IMO. The fate of the company and the fate of those americans that the company serves depends on it.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Odd...when more than half the vehicles sold in the US last year were built by GM, Ford or Chrysler....but 2/3 of potential buyers aren't even looking at domestics? Does that mean that more than half of the potential buyers who don't look at domestics just won't buy a car instead of looking at a domestic?

Good point.

But I would like to know the effect of fleet sales and how much they skew the numbers.

Not to mention the lack of a Japanese presence in the truck market. For example; are people buying GM trucks simply because they like them or simply because Honda doesn't build a decent alternative.

[Drew Dowdell]

Go to JibJab and click on the Big Box Mart movie.

[Hogans_Heroes]

The Oshawa #2 and Spring Hill #1 are smoke and mirrors.  Both Oshawa and Spring Hill will be renovated and updated with C-Flex production technology and become flexible one manufacturing operations.  Both plants have products slated for them, so there futures are secure.  This a a day that has had to happen for years, it's tough, but this will secure GM's future as they realign capacity to natural demand.  This isn't the end folks, but a bold new beginning for GM.  Rest assured GM isn't going bankrupt anytime soon and will make inroads in the near future.

[post="46136"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

AH-HA, first off you know I'm a big fan. However, I can't bring myself to envision these plants both reopening. You've also offered rationale for Oklahoma City reopening as well. All three plants reopening with new product and investment? Are you sure? This would seem to need to be predicated upon a resurgence in market share beyond any current expectation. Too much of my own esteem is wrapped up in GM's success and I hope you're right the automaker will make significant inroads. Your enthusiasm for future product sustains me. It does. That said, that all three plants would reopen I think seems a bit fanciful.

As someone who's found myself suddenly trying to fit 400,000 LAMBDAs into Delta Township, I can sympathize with your nod to the LAMBDA vans needing somewhere to be built, but have to hesitate before reopening these shuttered facilities.

Lastly, as for Spring Hill #1 and Oshawa #2 being "smoke and mirrors", GM has promised the financial community that these cuts to be enacted will result in a "run-rate" structural cost savings of $7 billion / yr from the end of 2008 on. If GM plans to reopen a significant amount of this capacity / these plants / lines with new product and the large investment required to retool them for C-Flex or LAMBDA, then GM would have provided false and misleading information to the investment community regarding the run-rate cost savings.

[Hogans_Heroes]

This is something the CAW would've know about in advance.  If they weren't aware of this politicians would be in an uproar and revoke their investment dollars from GM, but this isn't the case.  This is only a temporary situtation for Oshawa.  The car plants are going to be retooled and become flexible operations on one production line on top of investment in the all important truck plant, which is moving to GMT900 and eventually GMT1000.  This is nothing shocking coming from GM for those in the industry, just wait come 2009-10.

[post="46269"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

That's a very good, interesting, and insightful point regarding the CAW & Ontario pols. How confident are you Oshawa #2 will be retooled for C-Flex, though? I think it might just die.

[Hogans_Heroes]

Osh#2's ceasing of production coincides with the end of the Lacrosse and Grand Prix.  THen they can retool for the next wave of new products.  What could they be? :AH-HA_wink:

P.S. It's also easy to make quality products when you've been building derivatives of the same car for over a decade.

[post="46286"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Yes, Lacrosse/Allure and Grand Prix end roughly around this time. The Lacrosse/Allure will transition to Orion Township (needed to justify 2nd shift given G6 output) though and the Grand Prix will just be relegated to the dust bin of history. You yourself said Project Beacon is dead. Oshawa #2 won't, in my estimation, be retooled. Nor will a Saturn mid-size MAV be built there. Instead, product you may be envisioning for the plant (if I correctly ascertain your thoughts - by no means certain) could be built in Hamtramck, along with a RWD Zeta Cadillac DTS & Buick Lucerne - plus one product which could help to explain the 3rd shift elimination at Oshawa #1.

Agree on the quality remarks.

[Hogans_Heroes]

The one thing no one has talked about is Spring Hill #1 ceasing Ion production at the end of 2006.  What happens to the Ion then? :AH-HA_wink:

[post="46276"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

My bet is GMX002 NG Saturn ION 4dr ("Evoke"?) based on DELTA, built in Lordstown, beginning Sep-07 after an 8 month hiatus in which none are built following a build-out followed by inventory burn.

[cardood]

the sonata is ugly and looks like a bloated 98 escort.  it does have more power, but they are already having engine issues with that car.  the 500 has outstanding steering feel and a great firm ride with very good bump control.  its eerily quiet at times on the road.  its built damn solid and has a level of refinement that has been prised by owners and critiques alike.  you can easily (if you had driven one) imagine the 500 feeling composed at speeds of 100+ mph all day.  the interior of the sonata made me gag.  its an ugly piece of crap the media is putting up on a throne.  i cannot imagine wanting to be seen in a posuer brand sedan that pretty much telegraphs to the world that you are a cheap ass and have no desire to own anything besides a cut rate product.  The sonata reminds me of selling a car at a 'dollar store'.  The LaCrosse and Impala are much more desirable cars IMHO than the Sonata.  seriously, you want a car that will last more than 3 years, right?  then don't get the sonata!  If you are going to get a Sonata, just skip it and get the Altima, Accord or Camry you really feel you should have.

The Sonata is a forgettable piece.  there is nothing about the sonata that is stylish, or instills a desire to own.  Please use a real example next time.  I swear, if that's the best you can do, I'll send the folks from the looney bin over to pick you up.

The Impala is a far more desirable car than the tin can sonata.  they should be seeling sonatas at walmart, that's the environment those pos's belong in.

the fusion makes the sonata dated already and the sonata just came out.

[post="46565"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Sorry, can't let this one go by without comment.

Have you seen Hyundai's quality? Have you heard about Sonata's crash test results? Have you heard about their warranty? Have you heard about their pricing?

All of the above are near or best-in-class.

This type of uninformed commentary was probably the same type that some said about Honda and Toyota 30 years ago and Hyundai accelerated faster. Soon China will be here too.

GM needs to start building 'no excuse' vehicles. Their vehicles are good but there is always a "but". The 2007 Escalade interior is better "but" look at the door trim panels: 1990 GM design. Not cohesive with the rest of the interior. Corvette: lots of power "but" its a pushrod engine. Not many present day world class sports cars with OHV, are there? STS: nice rig "but" it looks way too much like a CTS. If a consumer is shelling out another $10-30k, I want it to look like it.

In short, Hyundai is another car company that is passing GM because I feel that GM has the same view as yours.

The emporer has no clothes.

c|d

[Hogans_Heroes]

Contrary to all the media crap, GM needs Janesville simply because without it, they wouldn't don't have the capacity to produce the full-size SUVs.  Silao and Arlington aren't go anywhere either, all these plants are needed.

[post="46138"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I agree with this sentiment, although it is my understanding Silao is not tooling up to produce the GMT92x/93x SUVs and will instead only produce GMT900 pickups at the onset. It should maintain the flexibility to produce the SUVs in the future should demand warrant, but I don't believe this is the intention.

Following the Silao development, Janesville's future should have been viewed as virtually assured, though I hope GM may have secured some concessions regardless. I share your sentiments regarding the media.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

[quote name='Polish_Kris' date='Nov 21 2005, 04:32 PM']I truly doubt that your conspiracy theory is correct.[/quote]

First off, I never said anything about a conspiracy theory.

[quote]If the media controlled the car market, they would be very pro american![/quote]

Why? After all "Toyota is investing in America" remeber?

Seriously, there is A LOT of ill will in the media toward domestics, anyone can see that on recall day.

[quote]So, don't the gun and start accusing the media automatically.[/quote]

Look, all I'm saying is that media in general influences pop culture. It's a fact. Would the Escalade sell so well without the endorsment of hip-hop artists? Would people buy Abercrombie jeans at a premium over American Eagle if it weren't for being told that they're better? Would the G6 have gotten such positive exposure during it's launch had it not been for Opra? Would Toyota seal a sale on a Corolla that has roughly the same statistic reliability as a Cobalt if it weren't for Consumer Reports reccommending them? These are very basic examples...

[quote]I think it's hard for you to swallow the fact that GM is in trouble now because of its poor management, and forcing the public their "gotta have" cars, shoving them down their throats.[/quote]

Funny.... Yet the other day people here were b*tching because of my negativity toward GM.. Which is it today? Am I a pessimist or in denial?

[quote]So you start playing the blame game.[/quote]

The media is partly to blame for GM's problems...

[quote]You're doing the same thing the KKK does, by saying its the black people's fault why America is the way it is.  And the same thing Hitler did in Nazi Germany, but saying "It's the fault of the Jews why Germany is in ruins"  You're pointing fingers at the media and the imports.  "It's their fault".[/quote]

:rotflmao: Yeah, because I'm an ignorant redneck commiting genocide.

[quote]No, I said it once and I'll say it again, it's GM's own fault why this is happening![/quote]

Dude seriously... I get such amusement out of your responses... I can rant for 2 pages on something and you wont say a word, then I throw out a one-liner that YOU misunderstood AFTER 2 other people have BLATANTLY attacked the media for bias in the same thread and you go into a seizure of b*tching and attacking about how I'm the anti-christ and how it actually MATTERS what you think.

You're no different than me, you have you're opinion and I have an opinion. We're not saving Christmas here, it's an automotive website. I'm not saying I'm right, it's simply an opinion. But I do think that the majority of people in the industry and here on this site would agree that while maybe not the terror that I make it out to be, the media is biased.

[quote]It's easy to blame others, instead of solving the problem.  GM needs to get rid of those 70 year old white guys who run it and take more control over the UAW unions who, and start the company on a fresh note.

[post="46246"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

[/quote]

I do agree with that.

[Hudson]

Joins the Cobalt at Lordstown?

(The new ION, not the current one)

Don't count on that one.

[Hudson]

i guess if you aren't in those groups, you're a big phuq-qing loser....if you believe what advertising tells you and all the cultural mavens in the world.

From that description, all that's left are rural conservative blue collar workers with no direction and no chance for promotion.

[Hudson]

Let me repeat ... the 500 is NOT a mid size sedan ... at least not according to the EPA.

It's a full size, in the same class as the Avalon, Lucerne, and Sonata.

They all fall into the FAMILY SEDAN category....a few cubic feet here or there doesn't make two vehicles uncompetitive. Just because the Sonata inches across the full-sized line (according to the EPA), doesn't mean it doesn't compete with the mid-sized Camry or Accord....of the larger Five Hundred and Avalon for that matter.

[Hudson]

First, I think this is an argument that will increasingly be used against GM when Toyota starts getting scrutiny and I'll counter it with this; GM still employess more people here and contributes more to this economy than Toyota. Sure, Toyota is investing here, but they're not investing here just so they can employ americans, they're investing here because it makes them profit. So, that means most of the money is still going back to Japan because the goal of a business isn't to be a good citizen after all, it's to make money.

And GM is employing Americans out of the goodness of its heart? GM doesn't send all production to Mexico, Brazil, India, Thailand, China, and Korea because building vehicles in North America makes BUSINESS SENSE, the same reason why Toyota's doing it. There's no difference between why GM does it and why Toyota does it. Much of the money Toyota makes in North America STAYS in North America.

Toyota understands that you need to build where you sell. It's good for the economy which, in turn, sells more cars and trucks. Henry Ford knew this 90 years ago...Toyota still knows it today. Name one company who sells vehicles in significant volume in North America who doesn't build vehicles in North America.

GM has contributed and is still contributing to our economy for close to 100 years now and while I'm glad Toyota is employing americans, I don't think that should be forgotten.

Again, you're assuming that GM's doing charity work. If they could build all of their vehicles in non-UAW plants and in lower-cost countries, they would. GM is a business first...charity work is way down on the list.

Secondly, GM has to sustain itself. thousands of Americans, you know the same americans that won't buy an american car, depend on the company for dividends, healthcare and pension. Therefore, to invest in america, a market in which GM has been in perpetual decline for 30 years and already has capacity issues in would be a VERY BAD business move. GM has done what it should've done and what any smart corporation would've done and taken what limited money it has and invested in growth areas such as China and Latin America. If GM were to invest in america which increasingly won't buy it's cars in the first place that'd be suicide. Not to mention that any facility GM build here would almost certainly include the costly and greedy UAW.

So...GM shouldn't invest in the US market because the buyers don't like their products? This investment would be suicide but NOT investing is the best move?

I don't believe that investing in North American products is "suicide" for GM. I'm an out-spoken opponent of buying American simply because it's an American brand. But GM can (and needs to) design and build vehicles that Americans want. Aside from the full-sized trucks, GM doesn't have much that appeals to a mainstream audience. Investment is NEEDED, not suicide. They don't need more plants...just better products.

It's very unfair to point the finger at GM and say that they are reluctant to invest in america (Which is what some will do-trust me) when the coin has both sides. When american's start investing in american auto makers then american auto makers might start investing in america, given that capacity from a bygone era, the UAW, healthcare and all other unfair hinderances against these companies are addressed. Until then, onward to China IMO. The fate of the company and the fate of those americans that the company serves depends on it.

Wait! Didn't you just say "If GM were to invest in america which increasingly won't buy it's cars in the first place that'd be suicide" and a paragraph later you're stating that "It's very unfair to point the finger at GM and say that they are reluctant to invest in america (Which is what some will do-trust me)?"

In order for Americans to invest in American car companies, the car companies need to prove they know what they're doing. Why would you invest in a company that has done little to show their ability to cater to a market? The fate of the company is in the hands of the leadership of GM...Toyota is not to be blamed...the media is not to be blamed.

[cmattson]

Ouch! All this is making my head hurt! All I know for certain after reading all this is that I'd love to get The Griffon and Ah-Ha out drinking one night. Edited November 22, 2005 by cmattson

[The O.C.]

I'm not saying its funny, I'm saying its funny that Canada's economy is going up meanwhile the great giant United States will be beat by Canada economically, by funny, I mean "wow"

[post="46274"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I don't know where you live, but out here, the economy is BOOMING. Of course, we are not dominated by Big3 automotive manufacturing......

I don't see the U.S. doing anything else other than REMAINING an economic worldwide powerhouse. The Big3's economic outcome is not going to affect THAT.

Too many business sectors in the U.S. are prospering.....compared to Big3 automobile manufacturing.

[The O.C.]

Good point.

But I would like to know the effect of fleet sales and how much they skew the numbers.

Not to mention the lack of a Japanese presence in the truck market. For example; are people buying GM trucks simply because they like them or simply because Honda doesn't build a decent alternative.

[post="46712"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

:blink:

Ooooooo......that's a scary and probably VERY correct statement......add in because Honda, nor Toyota, nor Nissan, etc., make a decent (read...heavy-duty enough) alternative.

[Croc]

I don't know where you live, but out here, the economy is BOOMING.  Of course, we are not dominated by Big3 automotive manufacturing......

I don't see the U.S. doing anything else other than REMAINING an economic worldwide powerhouse.  The Big3's economic outcome is not going to affect THAT.

Too many business sectors in the U.S. are prospering.....compared to Big3 automobile manufacturing.

[post="46787"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Dude...I know you love Cali don't get me wrong I do too but good lord you are extremely isolated from the rest of the country. There is no booming economy outside of California, and frankly I don't see much evidence of it inside California either! Cali isn't as bad as the rest of the country right now, but it ain't booming either.

[Robert Hall]

Dude...I know you love Cali don't get me wrong I do too but good lord you are extremely isolated from the rest of the country.  There is no booming economy outside of California, and frankly I don't see much evidence of it inside California either!  Cali

Depends on where you are and the local economy and industry. While not exactly booming, the software development job market is pretty strong right now in my area (Denver metro)--much better than the last 4 years.

[Guest gmrebirth]

you still don't get it

i WAS shopping midsizers

galant
g6
grand prix
mazda 6
impala
the nissan brothers
06 passat

i got more room for the same price by looking at a full sizer.  sometimes folks don't limit their scope so much.  just because the 500 was classified as a full sizer, doesn't mean i ruled it out.  i was looking at 'what can one get, for x price'.  the value equation.  i would bet many other folks broaden their view of the world too.  unless you're a camry or accord buyer, then you only seemingly have 2 choices.

why would i buy a camry when

i could either spend 28 grand on a v6 camry or 28 grand on a nice impala ss
or i could get an 06 passat 2.0t with a few options
or a GXP GP or even a slightly used GXP Bonne
or a galant GTS
or a well equipped basic maxima

i am only using my example as a scenario that others use.  sometimes you don't limit yourself to predefined classes the media dreams up for you. of course, who am i kidding, most Americans are pretty dumb and can't reason for themselves when it comes to car shopping.  i know lots of folks that go in looking at pickups and get SUV's or crossovers.  etc.

some geek where i work has  new Jetti GLI they likely blew 28 grand on. cute car ,er, corolla, i say.

[post="46552"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Sure .. you could have gotten an underpowered and overpriced Passat for 28 grand.

And sure, you could have gotten a GXP, with it's Fisher Price interior, But wait, why mention the GXP? I thought we were talking about family sedans, not quasi-sports sedans. If you wanna mention cars like the GXP, then that opens the door to MANY more competitors, and then this just gets way too out of hand.

OR you could have spent 28 grand and gotten a nice Avalon.

You consider it 'ugly', but style is purely subjective, and a matter of preference. The reason I talk about the Avalon is that it is better than it's competition in many objective ways. Do you think C & D is biased because the Avalon placed first in it's car comparo, ahead of the 500? But wait, before you say they're biased, they also placed the Fusion ahead of the Sonata and Camry in another comparo.


"The media dreams up for you" ... umm how about NO.

This may be hard to understand, as you are American, and I live in Canada, but here in Canada most people shop based on certain "criteria". Large cars are not that popular, in fact compacts are the most popular groups of cars, along with crossovers. Mid size sedans are also quite popular. Vans are also popular as well. Many people here do not shop *just* based on price. For a lot of people, the size of the car DOES matter. For many, a 500 would be too big dimensionally. The 500 is in exterior terms noticeably larger than a Sonata or an Avalon, but yet it's interior space is not as efficiently used. The Sonata looks small from the outside, yet offers more room then you would expect inside. The 500 though offers just the amount of room you would expect, just because it looks so big.

[Guest gmrebirth]

do your research, the 500 offers nav, as well as dvd entertainment

[post="46558"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Fair enough ... you're right, it does.

But can you get a 500 with Navi for 20k? I don't think so.

The Navi is only available on the top model Limited, and even then it's optional. At those kind of prices, the 500 begins to lose it's great value, and begins to be overshadowed by some of the pricier competition.

[Guest gmrebirth]

the sonata is ugly and looks like a bloated 98 escort.  it does have more power, but they are already having engine issues with that car.  the 500 has outstanding steering feel and a great firm ride with very good bump control.  its eerily quiet at times on the road.  its built damn solid and has a level of refinement that has been prised by owners and critiques alike.  you can easily (if you had driven one) imagine the 500 feeling composed at speeds of 100+ mph all day.  the interior of the sonata made me gag.  its an ugly piece of crap the media is putting up on a throne.  i cannot imagine wanting to be seen in a posuer brand sedan that pretty much telegraphs to the world that you are a cheap ass and have no desire to own anything besides a cut rate product.  The sonata reminds me of selling a car at a 'dollar store'.  The LaCrosse and Impala are much more desirable cars IMHO than the Sonata.  seriously, you want a car that will last more than 3 years, right?  then don't get the sonata!  If you are going to get a Sonata, just skip it and get the Altima, Accord or Camry you really feel you should have.

The Sonata is a forgettable piece.  there is nothing about the sonata that is stylish, or instills a desire to own.  Please use a real example next time.  I swear, if that's the best you can do, I'll send the folks from the looney bin over to pick you up.

The Impala is a far more desirable car than the tin can sonata.  they should be seeling sonatas at walmart, that's the environment those pos's belong in.

the fusion makes the sonata dated already and the sonata just came out.

[post="46565"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Wow, do you work for Ford or GM or something?

Getting layed off soon?

You're taking this a bit too seriously ... as if your life or career depended on it.

And, thanks for revealing just how one-sided and extremely biased you are. You probably refuse to buy ANYTHING other than a blue oval badged vehicle I bet :rolleyes:

You talked primarily about "value for x price", you made no real mention of styling or performance. I mean, you reasonably cannot expect great styling and great performance from a 20K family sedan.

And with regards to value, I mentioned the Sonata, because it IS great value.

Again, styling is completely subjective, so there's no point in arguing with you there. Whatever you may think of it's styling, one thing you can't deny is the material quality. I've been in the Sonata, and the material quality, as well as fit and finish is great. About the same as a 500.

I have not heard of any engine issues myself, but I would be curious to know about them.

I've been in a 500 (not driven), as I previously mentioned, and the Duratec engine got annoying with it's growling, and the 6 speed was not as smooth as I expected. Sure it was comfortable, and fairly composed on the road.

Funny that you mention all these derogatory things, and insults, when you have no clue of objective reality. Check up on quality ratings ... the Sonata has been one of the most reliable sedans out there for a few years now. Check out the reviews of the Sonata, all of them are rave reviews.

I would hardly call the Impala "far more desirable". Maybe the SS, but that's way out of the price range of the Sonata anyways. I was strictly comparing the Sonata with the 500.

[Croc]

Depends on where you are and the local economy and industry.  While not exactly booming, the software development job market is pretty strong right now in my area (Denver metro)--much better than the last 4 years.

[post="46806"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Exactly...not "booming." That's all I was getting at. CA is a great state, and IMO one of the better ones in the Union. That said, I know some of our posters are still hurting economically and don't really need it thrown into their faces implicitly, especially not when the current state of things here was being exaggerated so much.

If CA were in such an "amazing" economic boom I wouldn't be seeing nearly as many transients all over the USC area and I wouldn't be dodging bum feces on Figueroa. Just saying...

[Guest gmrebirth]

again, do your research

500-203 hp 3754 lbs, (not 4000), 18.49 pphp, 7.9 0-60 16.3 1/4 mi 20mpg 54/53/21 space (C/Djuly 05 and mar 05)
comments-'classy looks inside and out' 'the Five Hundred goes down the road with unusual precision and composure'  'ride quality is above reproach, and road manners are surprisingly capable'  'Inside, the Five Hundred is roomy, and it looks and feels terrific'

camry- 190hp  3489 lbs, 18.36 pphp, 7.6 0-60  15.9 1/4 mile 20mpg  54/48/17 space (C/D 12/05)
comments- "The word "responsive" just doesn't come up in any appraisal of this car."  "Too AARP in its control responses"

seems as though the camry has a very slight accel. advantage that is more than offset by its deficiencies.....but that is EXACTLY my point.  you just assumed the toyota was better, and DIDN'T research the difference yourself, much less driveone.  that's the point of my continuous harping here.  you didn't even consider the chance it would be superior.  compare the backseatsand you'd know the camry is deficient.  ford has the camry cornered, the fusion and 500 are both better buys and solutions than the camry.  The impala is better.  the lacrosse is more interesting and desirable. 

a 4 cylinder passat is a much better car than the camry v6.

sorry to steal the thread...just trying to educate someone who can't imagine a world without toyota as their leader.  someone who needs to research first. and maybe drive something.

people using sonatas and camrys as benchmarks for comparisons clearly are not car lovers.  they are car haters looking for a solution that they don't have to interface with a car.

GM's falldown AGAIN has as much to do with image and prejudice and media influence as anything.

its sad that the number one spot will get taken over by a lame ass company like toyota.  if GM is losing their top spot, at least it could be to some company that aren't a bunch of liars and contrarians and by SOMEONE who can at least make an interesting car.  yeah, your children won't die from asthma because we sell sell a prius but hey, we won't say anything about those sequioas we sell that get 14 mpg ifyou won't.  your air is clean only because you bought a prius.

[post="46595"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Way to answer a question nobody asked.

All I said was that the Camry V6 outperforms your 500, and that is true.

You go off making all these statements about how the Camry is inferior to the 500 in every way. There is no need for that, as that wasn't even what we were discussing. The Camry's flaws are quite obvious.

Besides, I would personally wait and compare the new Camry not the old one. Sure, the current Camry is the one sold right now, but hey, the Taurus is still sold *right now*, so why not compare the Camry to a Taurus? Because it's just not reasonable.

Again, you assume like no tomorrow about what I have and have not driven, what I know and do not know.

"educate"? Man, are you getting personal.

You're trying to shove your biased opinion down my throat, and I don't like that.

I try and stay neutral ... and I give all competitors an equal chance.

The 500 is a good car, but so is the Sonata, and the Avalon, and the Impala, etc etc.

Go and preach your biased opinion to someone who cares.

[Guest gmrebirth]

GM lays off 3,800 in Oshawa while Toyota hires 800 in Woodstock. 
  This is what we have been talking about - GM, Ford and Chrysler still employ many times more than Japan Inc, yet the consumer still doesn't get it.

  KEEP BUYING THOSE TOYOTAS, KIDS. WE CAN ALL GO WORK FOR WAL-MART

[post="46675"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

.... and GM, Ford, and Chrysler also lay off and cut more jobs than "Japan Inc."

When was the last time you heard about Toyota cutting jobs in the US?

Please, I'd like to hear it.

Yes, the Big 3 OBVIOUSLY employ more people ... that's common sense. But as the old saying goes, "the bigger they are the harder they fall". GM in particular, has a workforce that is too bloated. And with such a large workforce, a company in GM's position is bound to have massive layoffs. Where do you think those layed off employees are going to go? Back to GM, or maybe to Ford? Ford too will experience layoffs, and Chrysler isn't exactly in a great position either. Plus, how do you think these employees will feel? What kind of opinion will they have of GM, or the Big 3 in general ... especially those who may have been heavily relying on their jobs to sustain themselves and their family?

Yes, job cuts must happen in order for GM to become a better company, but those job cuts come with a price. One price is a negative opinion formed by employees, and to some extent, the public as well.

The japanese makers are all building new factories in N. America, and some of those layed off employees from GM factories will find their way to Toyota, Honda, or Nissan facilities.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Monte Carlo sales are in the dumpster. So much for the "there is still a mid size coupe market".

I've seen all of one MC since the new one broke cover and that was at an auto show... GM should try STOCKING some MC's before assuming they don't sell. Or they could just give the market away to a competing manufacturer like they have with every other coupe market.

GM lays off 3,800 in Oshawa while Toyota hires 800 in Woodstock.
This is what we have been talking about - GM, Ford and Chrysler still employ many times more than Japan Inc, yet the consumer still doesn't get it.

KEEP BUYING THOSE TOYOTAS, KIDS. WE CAN ALL GO WORK FOR WAL-MART

:rotflmao:

It'll be a hard lesson learned.

[Polish_Kris]

GM lays off 3,800 in Oshawa while Toyota hires 800 in Woodstock. 
  This is what we have been talking about - GM, Ford and Chrysler still employ many times more than Japan Inc, yet the consumer still doesn't get it.

  KEEP BUYING THOSE TOYOTAS, KIDS. WE CAN ALL GO WORK FOR WAL-MART

[post="46675"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Remember when the UAW was critisizing the Japanese for not unionizing their plants. Where is the UAW is "help" their employees now? The non-union plants now are 800 stronger and meanwhile, 3,800 lose their jobs in a unionized work place, that is designed to protect their workers from lay-offs.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

And GM is employing Americans out of the goodness of its heart? GM doesn't send all production to Mexico, Brazil, India, Thailand, China, and Korea because building vehicles in North America makes BUSINESS SENSE, the same reason why Toyota's doing it. There's no difference between why GM does it and why Toyota does it. Much of the money Toyota makes in North America STAYS in North America.

Toyota understands that you need to build where you sell. It's good for the economy which, in turn, sells more cars and trucks. Henry Ford knew this 90 years ago...Toyota still knows it today. Name one company who sells vehicles in significant volume in North America who doesn't build vehicles in North America.

Again, you're assuming that GM's doing charity work. If they could build all of their vehicles in non-UAW plants and in lower-cost countries, they would. GM is a business first...charity work is way down on the list.

True.... I guess my bias slanted things

So...GM shouldn't invest in the US market because the buyers don't like their products? This investment would be suicide but NOT investing is the best move?

From a capacity standpoint ( bulk jobs) yes, GM doesn't need more capacity. From a design standpoint, absolutely not. I'm not suggesting GM abandon the market, not at all.

But GM can (and needs to) design and build vehicles that Americans want.

Agreed.

Investment is NEEDED, not suicide. They don't need more plants...just better products.

Agreed, my sentiments exactly.

Wait! Didn't you just say "If GM were to invest in america which increasingly won't buy it's cars in the first place that'd be suicide" and a paragraph later you're stating that "It's very unfair to point the finger at GM and say that they are reluctant to invest in america (Which is what some will do-trust me)?"

In order for Americans to invest in American car companies, the car companies need to prove they know what they're doing. Why would you invest in a company that has done little to show their ability to cater to a market? The fate of the company is in the hands of the leadership of GM...Toyota is not to be blamed...the media is not to be blamed.

I should've been less vague....

By investment I meant strictly capacity and job creation, such as what Toyota is doing now. But I agree that GM still needs to step it up on the product side as far as engineering and innovation.

As far as Toyota, well, my beef is with the unfair advantages they have and the fact that they always exploit GM's weaknesses through an adoring media that is all too often happy to facilitate.

And I disagree with the media part too... Even if GM were to make stellar vehicles but the media chose to rate them badly then they simply will not survive because the of media scrutiny combined with their damaged reputation (Yes, GM's fault to a large degree) So, essentially it's the choice of the media whether or not GM survives because they are the direct line of communication to the consumer and they can either destroy or rebuild GM.

With all of the ill will for GM in the media (Admitted in some cases even) and the fact that most consumers already view the imports in higher regard, I just tend to be very pessimistic about a GM comeback and/or media praise.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Remember when the UAW was critisizing the Japanese for not unionizing their plants. Where is the UAW is "help" their employees now? The non-union plants now are 800 stronger and meanwhile, 3,800 lose their jobs in a unionized work place, that is designed to protect their workers from lay-offs.

Good point...

The imports are VERY smart by not letting the UAW/CAW spread it's cancer to their US operations.

[Polish_Kris]

As far as Toyota, well, my beef is with the unfair advantages they have and the fact that they always exploit GM's weaknesses through an adoring media that is all too often happy to facilitate.

[post="46846"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

That's competition man, the consumer in the end will choose what they want. You can't shove things down people's thorats, or get mad when people don't buy domestic.

[sciguy_0504]

This thread has the makings of a car-based soap opera.

[regfootball]

Sorry, can't let this one go by without comment.

Have you seen Hyundai's quality? Have you heard about Sonata's crash test results? Have you heard about their warranty? Have you heard about their pricing?

All of the above are near or best-in-class.

This type of uninformed commentary was probably the same type that some said about Honda and Toyota 30 years ago and Hyundai accelerated faster. Soon China will be here too.

GM needs to start building 'no excuse' vehicles. Their vehicles are good but there is always a "but". The 2007 Escalade interior is better "but" look at the door trim panels: 1990 GM design. Not cohesive with the rest of the interior. Corvette: lots of power "but" its a pushrod engine. Not many present day world class sports cars with OHV, are there? STS: nice rig "but" it looks way too much like a CTS. If a consumer is  shelling out another $10-30k, I want it to look like it.

In short, Hyundai is another car company that is passing GM because I feel that GM has the same view as yours.

The emporer has no clothes.

c|d

[post="46728"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

time will prove the sonata is still a poseur car that will not last much beyond 5 years.

will your sonata get 5 star side imapct ratings WITHOUT its side airbags?

[regfootball]

From that description, all that's left are rural conservative blue collar workers with no direction and no chance for promotion.

[post="46745"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

hehe, kind of. funny, but not. good hard working smart folks.....that just must not fit into the cool group of hip popular culture. we leave the misfits on the cutting room floor and the type a's and hipsters and the media tell us all who's worth anything and who is not. if you want the world to think you're worth more than a bag of used and full diapers, you better drive euro or rice, apparently.

[regfootball]

Sure .. you could have gotten an underpowered and overpriced Passat for 28 grand.

And sure, you could have gotten a GXP, with it's Fisher Price interior, But wait, why mention the GXP? I thought we were talking about family sedans, not quasi-sports sedans. If you wanna mention cars like the GXP, then that opens the door to MANY more competitors, and then this just gets way too out of hand.

OR you could have spent 28 grand and gotten a nice Avalon.

You consider it 'ugly', but style is purely subjective, and a matter of preference. The reason I talk about the Avalon is that it is better than it's competition in many objective ways. Do you think C & D is biased because the Avalon placed first in it's car comparo, ahead of the 500? But wait, before you say they're biased, they also placed the Fusion ahead of the Sonata and Camry in another comparo.
"The media dreams up for you" ... umm how about NO.

This may be hard to understand, as you are American, and I live in Canada, but here in Canada most people shop based on certain "criteria". Large cars are not that popular, in fact compacts are the most popular groups of cars, along with crossovers. Mid size sedans are also quite popular. Vans are also popular as well. Many people here do not shop *just* based on price. For a lot of people, the size of the car DOES matter. For many, a 500 would be too big dimensionally. The 500 is in exterior terms noticeably larger than a Sonata or an Avalon, but yet it's interior space is not as efficiently used. The Sonata looks small from the outside, yet offers more room then you would expect inside. The 500 though offers just the amount of room you would expect, just because it looks so big.

[post="46809"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Canada...OHHHH, that's right. SOMEONE has to buy all those ECHOs and YARIS'.

BTW the new passat 2.0 is very quick and is a really nice car. drives wonderfully. quicker than the camry, i'd bet $$$. Edited November 22, 2005 by regfootball

[Guest gmrebirth]

time will prove the sonata is still a poseur car that will not last much beyond 5 years.

will your sonata get 5 star side imapct ratings WITHOUT its side airbags?

[post="46861"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Nobody is denying the 500's safety ... I mean it never hurts to have Volvo technology and expertise backing you :AH-HA_wink:

[Guest gmrebirth]

Canada...OHHHH, that's right.  SOMEONE has to buy all those ECHOs and YARIS'.

BTW the new passat 2.0 is very quick and is a really nice car.  drives wonderfully.  quicker than the camry, i'd bet $$$.

[post="46870"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

At least a Yaris lives up to it's name of being an economical car, unlike the "poseur" Daewoo Aveo ... oops, I mean Chevy Aveo. It gets pretty bad fuel economy for a car of it's size.

Passat 2.0T is faster than a Camry 3.0L V6, but it will be outgunned by a Camry V6 SE. Besides, the Passat is brand new. Why not be fair and compare the older Passat to the current OLD Camry?

Or be fair and wait till the new Camry comes out. Edited November 22, 2005 by gmrebirth

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

That's competition man, the consumer in the end will choose what they want. You can't shove things down people's thorats, or get mad when people don't buy domestic.

It's not that I get mad about people not purchasing domestics; that's their choice. I get mad about people NOT EVEN CONSIDERING domestics based on what they've been told or been told to do.

If a buyer were to cross shop Ford, GM and Toyota, then buy the Toyota because he liked it best then fine, more power to him. BUT if a buyer has never owned a domestic car or never directly had a bad experience with one, but automatically crosses GM and Ford off of his list before shopping them simply because so and so's brother supposedly had this or that problem, or because a biased LA Times reporter said it isn't cool to buy domestic, THAT'S when I get pissed.

And I think a lot of that goes on in todays market. Either people who have never even been exposed to a domestic in the first place or have had 0 problems with one still automatically write GM and Ford off because of "what they heard" or "what they read"

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

hehe, kind of.  funny, but not. good hard working smart folks.....that just must not fit into the cool group of hip popular culture.  we leave the misfits on the cutting room floor and the type a's and hipsters and the media tell us all who's worth anything and who is not.  if you want the world to think you're worth more than a bag of used and full diapers, you better drive euro or rice, apparently.

[post="46868"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

You know, it's sad but I tend to agree with this assessment.

[Polish_Kris]

NOT EVEN CONSIDERING domestics based on what they've been told or been told to do.

[post="46936"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

That's very untrue! I worked at a Honda dealership for 2 years, and I've seen many customers consider other vehicles than the Accord. Including domestics. Give me an example where people are told not to buy domestics?

[CaddyXLR-V]

At least a Yaris lives up to it's name of being an economical car, unlike the "poseur" Daewoo Aveo ... oops, I mean Chevy Aveo. It gets pretty bad fuel economy for a car of it's size.

Passat 2.0T is faster than a Camry 3.0L V6, but it will be outgunned by a Camry V6 SE. Besides, the Passat is brand new. Why not be fair and compare the older Passat to the current OLD Camry?

Or be fair and wait till the new Camry comes out.

[post="46926"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

If I wanted a car now, could I go buy the new Camry? You compare what you have now. Just like the 6 year old Silverado has been compared to the brand new Titan.

[regfootball]

At least a Yaris lives up to it's name of being an economical car, unlike the "poseur" Daewoo Aveo ... oops, I mean Chevy Aveo. It gets pretty bad fuel economy for a car of it's size.

Passat 2.0T is faster than a Camry 3.0L V6, but it will be outgunned by a Camry V6 SE. Besides, the Passat is brand new. Why not be fair and compare the older Passat to the current OLD Camry?

Or be fair and wait till the new Camry comes out.

[post="46926"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

man, you'd be surprised. that new passat 2.0T with tiptronic, I'd lay money down that the passat is much faster than the camry v6. I'd guess a 7.3 time for the Passat 4 cyl. from my test drive.

sure in 6 months a new camry will be here, but also consider the v6 passat is balls fast as well. Edited November 22, 2005 by regfootball

[regfootball]

It's not that I get mad about people not purchasing domestics; that's their choice. I get mad about people NOT EVEN CONSIDERING domestics based on what they've been told or been told to do.

If a buyer were to cross shop Ford, GM and Toyota, then buy the Toyota because he liked it best then fine, more power to him. BUT if a buyer has never owned a domestic car or never directly had a bad experience with one, but automatically crosses GM and Ford off of his list before shopping them simply because so and so's brother supposedly had this or that problem, or because a biased LA Times reporter said it isn't cool to buy domestic, THAT'S when I get pissed.

And I think a lot of that goes on in todays market. Either people who have never even been exposed to a domestic in the first place or have had 0 problems with one still automatically write GM and Ford off because of "what they heard" or "what they read"

[post="46936"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

MY GOD IT TOOK TEN PAGES OF POSTS TO GET TO THE ESSENCE OF IT!!!!!!!!!

BINGO! EXACTLY!

[Guest gmrebirth]

If I wanted a car now, could I go buy the new Camry? You compare what you have now. Just like the 6 year old Silverado has been compared to the brand new Titan.

[post="46991"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I agree.

But then let me turn the tables ... for example, whenever the 500 is compared to other cars, and it's lack of power is frowned upon, and it's bland styling is discussed, Ford fans unite and say "but but wait, the Duratec 35 is coming, and this is coming, and the 500 gets a facelift" etc.

It just pisses me off when domestic fanatics use this very same flawed principle.

You compare what you have NOW. If the 500's Duratec 30 is underpowered ... too bad, because that's what it has NOW.

[Guest gmrebirth]

man, you'd be surprised.  that new passat 2.0T with tiptronic, I'd lay money down that the passat is much faster than the camry v6.  I'd guess a 7.3 time for the Passat 4 cyl. from my test drive.

sure in 6 months a new camry will be here, but also consider the v6 passat is balls fast as well.

[post="47008"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

You didn't read what I wrote, did you?

A 2.0T with Tiptronic is rated by VW at around 7.4s 0 -60. A Camry LE or XLE, with the 3.0L V6 is slightly slower.

But, a Camry V6 SE, with the 3.3L V6 has been tested by various magazines to a 0 - 60 of 7s flat, and some mags like C & D have gotten high 6's 0 - 60.

Obviously the 3.6L Passat will be faster, because it will have more power.

But, like mentioned previously, lets compare what we have NOW, not what is to come in the future.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

wow do you really think that doing 0-60 under 9 seconds matters to 98% of americans? hell 9 second car is plenty fast, mine is 9.4 and i have no quarrels with its power. my truck is like 13 second and I DONT HAVE ANY PROBLEMS. people dont care if their car can do 0-60 in 6.8 seconds cause they NEVER WILL. most FAMILY SEDANS are faster than muscle cars these days, and yet people still dont care! i think a lot of them would rather have less power and better fuel economy (since they measure power as they feel it not as a number).

[razoredge]

oh boy ! Im glad Im not in this one, hang in there men ! all the kings horses and all the kings men

[ehaase]

I wish that the moderators would clean this thread up. How you go from discussing GM's plant closing to comparing Ford 500's to Asian mid size cars is beyond me. I hope that this site isn't going to end up like GMI.

[97regalGS]

Ouch!  All this is making my head hurt!  All I know for certain after reading all this is that I'd love to get The Griffon and Ah-Ha out drinking one night.

[post="46765"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

add in Hogans Heros and evok and it would be an educational evening.

[regfootball]

I agree.

But then let me turn the tables ... for example, whenever the 500 is compared to other cars, and it's lack of power is frowned upon, and it's bland styling is discussed, Ford fans unite and say "but but wait, the Duratec 35 is coming, and this is coming, and the 500 gets a facelift" etc.

It just pisses me off when domestic fanatics use this very same flawed principle.

You compare what you have NOW. If the 500's Duratec 30 is underpowered ... too bad, because that's what it has NOW.

[post="47112"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

you are right here. its a big flaw. but still, in spite of that, its still a great product. every product has a shortcoming. the virtues about it more than make up for the temporary inconvenience i have of having a bit less power than i really like. in fact, the power shortage is only below about 35 mph, and even then, its not a power shortage as much as its just the engine is growly. point...the car overall is still VERY GOOD....and the whole gist of this problem in the popular press and such to damn a product and company as complete and total crap and 'should go out of business' because the car does the sprint to 60 in 3 tenths of a second less than a toyota and sounds noisier. Even though the Toyota doesn't get better mileage, has less room, and has flimsier sheetmetal.

my point again is the whole sensationalist aspect of modern journalism....and the fact that its over-influencing the general public! the differences between a domestic car and Camry in truth are likely not that huge enough to warrant the extreme sensationalism you will read about it. To me, when the press amplifies that, its actually misreporting. Its only sensationalizing it to create ratings. Or sell magazines.

i own and aztek. yup, its UGLY. but owners LOVE them, talk to some of them. is the vehicle bad then? Not at all, owners swear by them. But the press took one aspect about them, the looks, and turned it into a poster child and smear campaign, to the point of such negative connotation it could have damaged the Pontiac brand and GM forever. But my God, the vehicle is great (pushrods and all), owners are happy. The looks and bad press killed sales. and then it got amplified to the point where its ridiculous.

Does a whole company need to brought down to extinction in the court of public opinion due to journalistic excess?

GM has a sale....OH MY GOD, giving people deals is BAD!!!!!!!!

GM put out an ugly car....OH MY THE SKY IS FALLING!

GM is having labor issues.....WE BETTER DO ALL WE CAN IN THE MEDIA TO GUARANTEE THE STOCK PRICE WILL PLUMMET.

the media needs to report the news, not be the news.

the topic is major capacity reduction and WHAT I AM SAYInG is part of this end result of having to close it all down is due to journalistic excess and the fact that the differences between asians and americans RIGHT NOW are marginal, if even worth discussing, and its a GODDAMN CRYING SHAME WE'VE ALLOWED THE PRESS TO FORM OUR OPINONS TO THE POINT WHERE WE WANT GM TO FAIL BECAUSE THEIR DOOR HANDLE CHROME DOESN'T SHINE AS BIRGHTLY AS A TOYOTA WHEN IN FACT IN PRoBABLY OTHERWISE COMPARES JUST FINE Edited November 23, 2005 by regfootball

[regfootball]

I agree.

But then let me turn the tables ... for example, whenever the 500 is compared to other cars, and it's lack of power is frowned upon, and it's bland styling is discussed, Ford fans unite and say "but but wait, the Duratec 35 is coming, and this is coming, and the 500 gets a facelift" etc.

It just pisses me off when domestic fanatics use this very same flawed principle.

You compare what you have NOW. If the 500's Duratec 30 is underpowered ... too bad, because that's what it has NOW.

[post="47112"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

when that 320 hp v8 hits the 500, yeah, then that will be nice. I'll turn in mine and get a nice new one with major balls then. Impala ss owners have no waiting! and 28 highway mpg!