GMNA to Undergo Major Capacity Reduction

[Cadillacfan]

Only the stretch versions are being dropped.  They were almost as big as the Tahoe/Yukon, so they probably were redundant.

[post="46368"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Yes, but what about the upcoming crossover SUVs? I know GMC is only getting one, but it would be very redundant for the brand to have two SUVs around the same size and possibly the same price. If they phase out the Envoy, where would that leave the TB. I don't think GM is going to want to keep building the Trailblazer and just the Trailblazer. Also, with the Rainier being phased out and the 9-7x eventually being replaced by a Saab crossover, the GMT360's future looks grim.


GM needs to get it's S&#@ together and fast. I don't care if GM won't be #1 anymore. I just want the company to still be here and turning a profit in ten years. Edited November 22, 2005 by Cadillacfan85

[gilli]

Okay, i'm going to throw this out as a possible scenario for Oshawa, the #2 plant closes. The land that the former #2 occupied is split to allow for a larger truck plant and an increase in the size of #1 to allow for new products perhaps in a flex type of set up. Perhaps also to allow for RWD production? What if the loss of the third shift in the #1 plant that makes both the impala and the monte carlo is not because the impala doesn't sell well, but because the monte carlo 's numbers aren't that high? I know the sound of lost jobs sucks but this is necessary for GM to try to fight back. I have no doubt that Buzz was a little left out of the loop on this one but I'm also sure that the majority of layoffs in Canada will come from early retirement in all three plants and eligable workers that remain in plant 2 will slide in to either 1 or the truck plant, making actual cuts less damaging to the local economy. I love it when the media hears layoffs and projects all doom and gloom but think of how many baby boomers are already on the door step of retirement and how many more could be there in the next 3 years. All GM is doing is reducing the workforce through retirements and not necessarily hiring new employees to replace those that leave.

[ehaase]

Yes, but what about the upcoming crossover SUVs?  I know GMC is only getting one, but it would be very redundant for the brand to have two SUVs around the same size and possibly the same price. 

[post="46389"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

No more redundant that Ford selling both the Freestyle and Explorer or Toyota selling both the Highlander and 4Runner. No credible person has said that GM has any plans to discontinue the regular wheelbase TrailBlazer and Envoy.

[Drew Dowdell]

Yes, but what about the upcoming crossover SUVs?  I know GMC is only getting one, but it would be very redundant for the brand to have two SUVs around the same size and possibly the same price.  If they phase out the Envoy, where would that leave the TB.  I don't think GM is going to want to keep building the Trailblazer and just the Trailblazer.  Also, with the Rainier being phased out and the 9-7x eventually being replaced by a Saab crossover, the GMT360's future looks grim.
GM needs to get it's S&#@ together and fast.  I don't care if GM won't be #1 anymore.  I just want the company to still be here and turning a profit in ten years.

[post="46389"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Nissan: Murano, Pathfinder
Toyota: 4Runner, Highlander
Ford: Freestyle, Explorer

[Drew Dowdell]

I've been buying up GM stock. I'm no Kerkorkian, but I do expect it'll be back into the mid-30s again. Besides, you're still getting $2 a share dividend on a @$24 investment.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

i love how every1 is saying this is going to ruin GM, arent most of these plants at like half capacity? hell even eliminating all these GM could probably still turn out just as many cars as they always have. this is streamlining their costs, closing inefficient plants (although i dont get Oshawa #2), and eliminating unnecessairy workers (although i admit that must be awful to be one of those workers...) you cannot run an inefficient business for too long like GM tried to do and now they are trying to cut costs not at quality level, but at quantity level. plus im sure they will get a pretty penny for all those plants

[balthazar]

If the media controlled the car market, they would be very pro american!

Why would you think that; can you support your theory?
Car magazines' primary duty is to sell magazines. If the current popular opinion is that imports are "better" (and it is), they serve their own purposes & longevity to cater to that.
Research the frequency of import vs. domestic vehicle road tests in car rags over the last 10 years- it'll open your eyes.

[thegriffon]

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]

That all depends - is is still Delta, Global Compact Car, or does it follow the Civic and Sentra and switch to another platform.

[sciguy_0504]

Obviously it's horrible this has to be done. I feel sorry for the people who are going to lose their jobs, it's always a tough thing. That being said, this has to be done. GM needs to return to a state of profitability with a lower percentage of market share. No car company is going to have a 30-50% market share, not Toyota, Ford, GM or DCX. It's unrealistic and not possible because the market is saturated with every type of vehicle imaginable and there are too many variables that people use to decide what kind of car they buy. Hopefully this is the last of major cuts at GM. I hope management did their homework, analyzed every possible outcome, thought of dozens of solutions and, in the end, went far enough. GM will be stronger, more agile and healthier when all is said and done.

[Cadillacfan]

That all depends - is is still Delta, Global Compact Car, or does it follow the Civic and Sentra and switch to another platform.

[post="46437"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

What will happen is that the Ion will probably be built along side the Cobalt or the HHR since they're on the same exact platform and will no longer be using dent-resistant body panels. From the artist renderings, it looks like the Ion may be the first real challenge to the Mazda 3.

[IbuyGM]

balthazaar, Import vehicles are not better by any stretch of anyones imagination. GM has the most vehicles with over 30mpg on freeway. We lead the SUV and truck segment with best mpg. The plants win Harbour reports all the time, I think GM has 3 in a row. Most of our vehicles are best in segment. The PPH on most vehicles is low. I think SUV are just above 100. Our performance is better, our quality is better, our selection is better. The media is somewhat against GM. Just wait and see neysayer. The GMT 900 will be a huge success along with other launches. And Toyota is starting to realize the problems we used to have, demand increases and now their quality is decreasing. But the media did not make as big of mention about that, even though it was one of the biggest recalls ever. WE BUILD WORLD CLASS VEHICLES EFFECTIENLY AND EFFECTIVELY. WE ARE THE LEADERS, and to keep that way, the General made some cuts. You have to do what you have to do. GM will dominate again. People are slowly and surely realizing Toyota builds poor quality.

[Guest gmrebirth]

yes, it's fair. Of course, for comparison purposes in print no one would ever go into the logistical nightmares of comparing such an assortment of models, but in real life people look at the options and weigh what the best car is for them based on what's important. Price, size, value, and style and important qualifications for this.

[post="46196"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I posted this to show how flawed this argument is.

I mean why buy a Monte Carlo LTZ, when you can get an Avalon or Avalon Limited for about the same price?

Or why buy a Focus when you can get an I4 Camry?

Fact is, most people go out shopping for cars with certain criteria. For example, a family might be looking for a midsize sedan. Obviously they are not going to cross shop full sizers like the 500. Rather, they will cross shop other midsizers.

Not everyone buys purely on price ... in fact many buy based on specific criteria.

And if price was such a big concern, we'd all be driving Hyundais, Kias, and Daewoos.

[Guest gmrebirth]

I guess if you want to blow 5 grand more, or more, you could get an avalon.

yes, the 500 needs improvements, but the avalon is not that much better a car.  but my point is most folks won't even stop to consider the 500 OR the FUsion, OR the impala, because its not a HIP import.

[post="46348"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I guess if you compare in terms of features and options, a similarly optioned 500 will be close in price to an Avalon.

A base 500 comes with almost nothing standard ... hell the 500 doesn't even offer Navi.

Sure, if you want "basic" transportation, a base 500 is fine ... but if you're so concerned about price, why didn't you get a Sonata?

For the same price, you could have gotten a Sonata V6, and it would have come loaded with more features and options than your 500. It also has a more powerful and more refined engine, and it probably handles better than a 500. But hey, who cares about handling in a family sedan anyways?

[Drew Dowdell]

I think what he is trying to say is that the Fivehundred is a full size car, in a midsize body with a midsize price. For some people it will be too big. Some people it will be too small. Some people it will be just right. Why would someone buy a Luscerne over an Avalon? Because they think <like me> that the new Avalon is hideous.. or they maybe they want a V8... or maybe Buick gave them a special offer if they traded in their LeSabre. I'm a technoweeny and I still don't care that neither my CTS nor the Lucerne have bluetooth.

[Drew Dowdell]

I guess if you compare in terms of features and options, a similarly optioned 500 will be close in price to an Avalon.

A base 500 comes with almost nothing standard ... hell the 500 doesn't even offer Navi.

Sure, if you want "basic" transportation, a base 500 is fine ... but if you're so concerned about price, why didn't you get a Sonata?

For the same price, you could have gotten a Sonata V6, and it would have come loaded with more features and options than your 500. It also has a more powerful and more refined engine, and it probably handles better than a 500. But hey, who cares about handling in a family sedan anyways?

[post="46487"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

For him.... size matters.... and the FiveHundred is probably the largest mid-sizer out there.


edit: the Five Hundred is only 3 inches longer then a Taurus's 197inches. The Crown Victoria is a full foot longer. Edited November 22, 2005 by Oldsmoboi

[Guest gmrebirth]

the 500's interior is pretty nice, i would not call the camry superior.

the 500's engine is kinda growly at times, and could use more torque, but the camry is no powerhouse either.

[post="46356"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The Camry may not be a powerhouse, but a Camry V6 will handily outperform your 500.

A V6 Camry weighs about 3300 - 3400lbs. A 500 weighs close to 4000lbs.

Oh, and I was just comparing specs of the Camry and 500 ... it's interesting in that the Five Hundred is about the same in most interior dimensions to the Camry, other than in rear leg room. Quite surprising ... you'd think the 500 was bigger than that.

Check it out for yourself:

http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/fivehundr...ures/specs/#dim

http://toyota.com/camry/specs_v6.html

In fact, the 500 only has a mere 6% more interior passenger volume than the Camry.

I've been in a 500, and that underpowered Duratec does begin to get annoying after a while with it's growling.

[Guest gmrebirth]

I think what he is trying to say is that the Fivehundred is a full size car, in a midsize body with a midsize price.  For some people it will be too big. Some people it will be too small. Some people it will be just right.

Why would someone buy a Luscerne over an Avalon? Because they think <like me> that the new Avalon is hideous.. or they maybe they want a V8... or maybe Buick gave them a special offer if they traded in their LeSabre.

I'm a technoweeny and I still don't care that neither my CTS nor the Lucerne have bluetooth.

[post="46490"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Why buy a 500 over a Sonata?

[Guest gmrebirth]

base 500 SE's were 20 grand when i was shopping.  try to find a camry 6 cylinder for that.

[post="46359"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I can find a nicely loaded Sonata V6 for that.

What's your point?

Edit: I was looking at Sonata specs ... and get this ... a Sonata has about 12% more interior volume than your 500.

http://hyundaiusa.com/vehicle/sonata/specs/specs.aspx Edited November 22, 2005 by gmrebirth

[IbuyGM]

Shouldn't you all be buying GM. Try a Malibu. That is midsize and the next generation one looks unbelievable.

[Guest gmrebirth]

For him.... size matters.... and the FiveHundred is probably the largest mid-sizer out there.
edit: the Five Hundred is only 3 inches longer then a Taurus's 197inches. The Crown Victoria is a full foot longer.

[post="46491"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

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.

[VenSeattle]

I can find a nicely loaded Sonata V6 for that.

What's your point?

Edit: I was looking at Sonata specs ... and get this ... a Sonata has about 12% more interior volume than your 500.

http://hyundaiusa.com/vehicle/sonata/specs/specs.aspx

[post="46496"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

UHM... :rolleyes:

The 500's interior volume is 129.5 cu ft compared to the Sonata's 121.7 cu ft. There's a big difference between interior volume (which is the combined total of passenger & cargo volume) and just passenger volume.

Sonata passenger volume: 105.4 cu ft
Sonata cargo volume: 16.3 cu ft
total: 121.7 cu ft

500 passenger volume: 108.3 cu ft
500 cargo volume: 21.2 cu ft
total: 129.5 cu ft

[Guest gmrebirth]

UHM...  :rolleyes:

The 500's interior volume is 129.5 cu ft compared to the Sonata's 121.7 cu ft. There's a big difference between interior volume (which is the combined total of passenger & cargo volume) and just passenger volume.

Sonata passenger volume: 105.4 cu ft
Sonata cargo volume: 16.3 cu ft
total: 121.7 cu ft

500 passenger volume: 108.3 cu ft
500 cargo volume: 21.2 cu ft
total: 129.5 cu ft

[post="46504"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Are you sure that cargo volume is a part of interior volume?

In either case, total interior volumes are not that far off. Edited November 22, 2005 by gmrebirth

[IbuyGM]

Shouldnt this be a topic under maybe other competitors. This one is about GMNA undergoing major capacity reduction. Lets get back on track

[VenSeattle]

Sorry  :rolleyes:

I was talking about interior PASSENGER volume.

[post="46507"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

In that case, the 500 is still larger than the Sonata and Camry by a notable difference:

Camry passenger volume: 101.8 cu ft
Sonata passenger volume: 105.4 cu ft
500 passenger volume: 108.3 cu ft

[Guest gmrebirth]

In that case, the 500 is still larger than the Sonata and Camry by a notable difference:

Camry passenger volume: 101.8 cu ft
Sonata passenger volume: 105.4 cu ft
500 passenger volume: 108.3 cu ft

[post="46509"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Ok ... so I misread the passenger/interior volume of the Sonata.

My point about it's value still stands.

[daves87rs]

I can't believe Janesville Assembly dodged the bullet!    It deserved to get the axe many times over with their cooperative workforce. Not my problem now, I'm glad I'm out of there, both Janesville Assembly and GM.

[post="46049"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Janesville is gone-not just yet-but very soon...

[regfootball]

I posted this to show how flawed this argument is.

I mean why buy a Monte Carlo LTZ, when you can get an Avalon or Avalon Limited for about the same price?

Or why buy a Focus when you can get an I4 Camry?

Fact is, most people go out shopping for cars with certain criteria. For example, a family might be looking for a midsize sedan. Obviously they are not going to cross shop full sizers like the 500. Rather, they will cross shop other midsizers.

Not everyone buys purely on price ... in fact many buy based on specific criteria.

And if price was such a big concern, we'd all be driving Hyundais, Kias, and Daewoos.

[post="46482"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

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. Edited November 22, 2005 by regfootball

[daves87rs]

Perhaps the Lucerne and Enclave will be the only Buick products after the 2008 model year.

[post="46069"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

No, they will at least have one. maybe two more...

[daves87rs]

Okay, so when the current craptacular CSV's are done, the idea is done for good?

I could REALLY see that being a logical choice, ESPECIALLY if the upcoming Lambda crossovers offer just as much space, but don't suffer from the minivan stigma.

Other than that question, they all seem pretty in line to me, except for the Oshawa thing....but maybe we'll hear more about that soon. :huh:

[post="46084"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

2007 will be the last model year..though a few 08s could sneak out. Otherwise
2007 would be last.

[regfootball]

I guess if you compare in terms of features and options, a similarly optioned 500 will be close in price to an Avalon.

A base 500 comes with almost nothing standard ... hell the 500 doesn't even offer Navi.

Sure, if you want "basic" transportation, a base 500 is fine ... but if you're so concerned about price, why didn't you get a Sonata?

For the same price, you could have gotten a Sonata V6, and it would have come loaded with more features and options than your 500. It also has a more powerful and more refined engine, and it probably handles better than a 500. But hey, who cares about handling in a family sedan anyways?

[post="46487"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

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

[daves87rs]

I wonder if it's a coincidence that the many of the GM plants being closed are in Republican dominated states (Tennessee, Georgia, Oklahoma).  The GOP is least likely to bail out GM and certainly would never consider national health care. There is a strong likelihood that the Atlanta, GA area will lose two assembly plants - both the GM minivans plant and Ford's Taurus plant near the airport.  The latest rumors are that Ford will not build the new Lincolns there; instead, the Lincolns may be built either in Chicago or in Wixom.

[post="46129"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Chicago maybe. Wixom will be closed next year.

[regfootball]

I guess if you compare in terms of features and options, a similarly optioned 500 will be close in price to an Avalon.

A base 500 comes with almost nothing standard ... hell the 500 doesn't even offer Navi.

Sure, if you want "basic" transportation, a base 500 is fine ... but if you're so concerned about price, why didn't you get a Sonata?

For the same price, you could have gotten a Sonata V6, and it would have come loaded with more features and options than your 500. It also has a more powerful and more refined engine, and it probably handles better than a 500. But hey, who cares about handling in a family sedan anyways?

[post="46487"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

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. Edited November 22, 2005 by regfootball

[daves87rs]

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]

Wow. Very true. When the news said that all those plants were closing, I was like
WTF?? I was dead sure it was just loss of shifts and a few plants, some of which they knew they were pretty much going to close...(like LCC, the 3800 plant..)
Even plants like D-ham are being fixed or updated for new product....

[daves87rs]

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]

Hmm...I'm still not convinced that Janesville has a lot of life left in it. It could just
be a one shift plant for a while...but if sales of the full sizers do that slow slide down...janesville would be gone in a flash.

If the SUVs do very well, on the other hand, then they are safe.....

[regfootball]

I guess if you compare in terms of features and options, a similarly optioned 500 will be close in price to an Avalon.

A base 500 comes with almost nothing standard ... hell the 500 doesn't even offer Navi.

Sure, if you want "basic" transportation, a base 500 is fine ... but if you're so concerned about price, why didn't you get a Sonata?

For the same price, you could have gotten a Sonata V6, and it would have come loaded with more features and options than your 500. It also has a more powerful and more refined engine, and it probably handles better than a 500. But hey, who cares about handling in a family sedan anyways?

[post="46487"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

the cheapest i could configure an avalon to match the equipment leve on my 500 (ltr,sunroof, etc) was 3 grand more, andthe avalon still did not have memory seats. id have SAB, but if i added 500 bucks to the ocst of my car it would still be a 2500 deficit, otherwise each may have an odd option or two that did not match.

I look at the Impala SS for around 28g transaction price and it lacks some options of the Avalon, but the avalon is ugly. why spend more for ugly?

[regfootball]

[FONT=Arial][FONT=Arial][FONT=Arial]

For him.... size matters.... and the FiveHundred is probably the largest mid-sizer out there.
edit: the Five Hundred is only 3 inches longer then a Taurus's 197inches. The Crown Victoria is a full foot longer.

[post="46491"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

ask your wife, she'll confirm that size matters.

[daves87rs]

I knew something was fishy when they said Spring Hill and Oshawa were closing. It just didn't add up. Then I figured, maybe it's something like a production hiatus, not a total lockdown and closure of these plants. Thanks for confirming my suspicions, AH-HA... you are truly one of the most valuable members of this forum.

I also agree that this sort of thing had to happen sooner or later. In fact, some of these plants should've been closed years ago. They all produce [mostly] unwanted products that glut up GM's inventory and consume GM's ever-diminishing funds. They're like cancer cells. And, to get rid of cancer, you usually have to undergo surgery and months and months of poisonous chemotherapy. The near future will not be kind to GM, but they are (finally) moving in the right direction. In fact, I applaud Wagoner for having the guts to do this. I think that, in the long term, he made the right call.

[post="46228"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Agreed.

[daves87rs]

Obviously it's horrible this has to be done.  I feel sorry for the people who are going to lose their jobs, it's always a tough thing.

That being said, this has to be done.  GM needs to return to a state of profitability with a lower percentage of market share.  No car company is going to have a 30-50% market share, not Toyota, Ford, GM or DCX.  It's unrealistic and not possible because the market is saturated with every type of vehicle imaginable and there are too many variables that people use to decide what kind of car they buy.

Hopefully this is the last of major cuts at GM.  I hope management did their homework, analyzed every possible outcome, thought of dozens of solutions and, in the end, went far enough.

GM will be stronger, more agile and healthier when all is said and done.

[post="46447"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Good point sci. :)

[daves87rs]

Shouldn't you all be buying GM.  Try a Malibu. That is midsize and the next generation one looks unbelievable.

[post="46499"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

At least you tried. they are going to beat a dead horse with this..... <_< :rolleyes:

[daves87rs]

[FONT=Arial][FONT=Arial][FONT=Arial]

ask your wife, she'll confirm that size matters.

[post="46578"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

:blink:

What the heck does this have to do with GM?! :angry:

[regfootball]

The Camry may not be a powerhouse, but a Camry V6 will handily outperform your 500.

A V6 Camry weighs about 3300 - 3400lbs. A 500 weighs close to 4000lbs.

Oh, and I was just comparing specs of the Camry and 500 ... it's interesting in that the Five Hundred is about the same in most interior dimensions to the Camry, other than in rear leg room. Quite surprising ... you'd think the 500 was bigger than that.

Check it out for yourself:

http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/fivehundr...ures/specs/#dim

http://toyota.com/camry/specs_v6.html

In fact, the 500 only has a mere 6% more interior passenger volume than the Camry.

I've been in a 500, and that underpowered Duratec does begin to get annoying after a while with it's growling.

[post="46493"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

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. Edited November 22, 2005 by regfootball

[regfootball]

I can find a nicely loaded Sonata V6 for that.

What's your point?

Edit: I was looking at Sonata specs ... and get this ... a Sonata has about 12% more interior volume than your 500.

http://hyundaiusa.com/vehicle/sonata/specs/specs.aspx

[post="46496"][/post]

are you for real?

54+53+21 = 128 cft = more than the sonata. whose but did you pull the 12% MORE out of? :blink:

hyundais number includes the trunk, buddy (58+47+16) you passed math class, right?





"flattery will get you nowhere, the escort said to the 8 years newer sonata"

MY POINT- why does everyone ASSUME the fried rice is always better???????????????????

GO GM, good night all watch those 07 tahoes fly out the door....... Edited November 22, 2005 by regfootball

[turbo200]

why are you guys still arguing about this in this thread. get over it or make a thread in the ford section. the point that people will search within a given price range and look at all the alternatives has been made again and again. let's get back to topic

[Chicagoland]

Well, some things about Oshwa closing. Monte Carlo sales are in the dumpster. So much for the "there is still a mid size coupe market". With Buick and Poncho merged, there is no need for 2 cars the same szie GP/LC. Mainly it looks like GM is just condensing production, eliminating redundancy in that area. Doraville was an easy one, but OK city I thought would stay. Also, people claim that GM is going to bring back BOF RWD cars such as the "Chevelle concept". Where will they build them with closing plants and bleeding cash??

[jmore1276]

Yes...let's cut the flleet business (Oshowa, Ont.) 'cause that's what you do when market share is down, right? Like the Caprice that everyone wishes had stayed. I think I remember when Chrysler was in trouble....the police cars kept their heads above water? Good Job Rick...don't want to disappoint the gready "DAY TRADERS"...I'm sure they'll be with you down the rough road ahead.... :cheers:

[ehaase]

Also, people claim that GM is going to bring back BOF RWD cars such as the "Chevelle concept". Where will they build them with closing plants and bleeding cash??

[post="46627"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

In the 2010 - 2012 time frame, the W and G bodies will be dropped, and something will need to be produced at Oshawa and Detroit-Hamtramck, and new RWD cars (Zeta or Sigma-lite) are a possibility.

[Ghost Dog]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...Story/Business/

The moves will reduce GM's employment here to a little more than 16,000.

That number is just above the threshold at which the federal and Ontario governments would require the auto maker to give back some of the $435-million in financial assistance they doled out this year.

[CARBIZ]

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

[cardood]

GM is going to shrivel up into a shadow of its former self.

[post="46053"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

GM already is a shadow of its former self.

[cardood]

Any way you cut it, this is the worst day for GM, *ever*.  :(

[post="46060"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I would argue that there have been plenty of bad GM days. Mid 1970's forward have been pretty bad. It's not like GM has not had time to work out it's issues. They have had over 30 YEARS to mend it's woes.