CARBIZ

Wow that sucks. I ran over a small dog about 12 years ago on a cold winter night. I pulled over and it lay, quivering on the pavement. I was afraid to touch it, incase it bit me, but I couldn't leave it. It was very cold (Feb.). A police car happened by. I just knelt beside the poor animal, talking soothingly to it, until it died. The officer wrapped it in a blanket and drove off. I hug my 10 year old Husky every night and thank God the one night he ran off across traffic 3 cars narrowly missed him!

Gawd knows I would be loathe to defend the media, but I doubt any of them would be caught dead in a base Civic anyway. Which brings me to my biggest beef about the automotive media: they despise anything that they themselves wouldn't drive. So, yeah - they do bitch about lack of DVD navigation (who the HELL needs that anyway?) in a $15k car, and how many speeds an automatic has because THEY have decided that is important. BTW, the Civic doesn't even have a split folding rear seat! As I have said many times, by focusing on what the media deems important, the Asian imports have succeeded. Automatic headlights, delayed locks, retained accessory power, power trunk on keyless remote (Corolla?) and a host of other features that are important to the consumer in every day driving, get nary a nod from the media nazis, but they gush and swoon over 0-60 times on a $14k car! That is the trouble with a lot of GM's cars: when people live with them for a week or so, they discover that "hey, this vehicle is pretty good and has a lot of features that are nice - WTF is CR talking about?"

While on the subject of dashes, why are the manufacturers all following each other like sheep? Everybody has the same iterations of boring, round guages. Yech. Whatever happened to some of the interesting (and wierd) set ups coming out of Detroit in the '60s? I like the horizontal designs, particularly of the late '60s Chryslers. They were clean and very linear. Brushed chrome and aluminum - way ahead of their time. GM could do well to work on those kind of themes. At least be different!

Part of the problems with multi-nationals in general is that nobody is really accountable. Face it, any board member can up and quit, get a similar job somewhere else. They don't really have any vested interest. And they sometimes sit on many boards at once, which can create conflicts - at the very least they don't care so much because their bread is being buttered by more than one company. The Henry Fords and Walter Chryslers OWNED the company. Their name was on the door. The way companies are bought and sold today, like loaves of bread. Maximizing shareholder value and doing what is best for the company is rarely the same thing. Corporations are becoming increasingly complex. What is needed are good communicators/organizers at the top. Those who know their own limitations, aren't afraid to delegate and know how to recognize and hire top talent. Bad example, but look at Madonna: Is she talented? Not really, but she is a smart business woman. She surrounds herself with top talent and checks her ego at the door. She has stayed at the top of her game, while many others (Jackson?) have fizzled and burned.

Large corporations are paralyzed to admit problems or mistakes because someone will sue. NO vehicle is perfect, and with forensic auditing these days, problems or even trends can be spotted easily. I would have to suggest that the spottiness of this "problem" has to be related to something other than the coolant itself or the gaskets. Why is it that one Venture will go 100k miles with no problems, yet another require two gaskets in the same time frame? And I do know of customers putting in the green anti-freeze, rather than Dex-Cool. I doubt this can be proved in Court. How can someone prove their vehicle was never tampered with, never had green fluid put in it or some other contaminant. Impossible.

Excellent piece! I've long argued that North America of today bares little resemblance to that of our grandparents' time - for better or worse. Part of the argument today that both parents must work is not out of necessity, but that the second job is required (in many cases) to pay for the toys and excessive consumer goods of our society. Vacations in Mexico, trips to Europe, 2 cars in the driveway, central a/c, etc. were unheard of 50 years ago. And what we expect of our vehicles has changed, too. My father factory ordered a '66 and then a '69 Chrysler 300 - both laden with performance goodies (optional disc brakes, TNT pkg, etc.), but no luxuries like a/c, power windows, etc. Times have changed when a Malibu comes with everything power as standard. With the complexities of the modern car (six air bags, ABS, DVD navigation, etc.) the costs involved for items that are involved in other than making the vehicle function as transportation are spiralling; thus, it no longer makes sense to dispose of a vehicle that is essentially a computer/entertainment system on wheels. Wallace has missed another big trend of the past 50 years: selfishness. People respected each other and were more community oriented then. Today, it is me, me, me. This has also dictated many trends from fashion to automobiles. Obscene ostentation is the new order. Twenty five thousand dollar watches. And imported anything. Why drive a Cadillac when you can drive an imported Mercedes? Why buy California wine when French is better, no?

Wow, this thread has been wobbling around like a drunk at last call! I'd like to second Krinkle's thoughts about the DTS and chime in that Cadillac should not necessarily be chasing BMW. Since when did luxury become hijacked by 0-60 times? Perhaps Pontiac should be chasing BMW. There are a lot of well-heeled 60+ people out there and the majority of them would rather have a Buick, but it is the rags that are telling them otherwise.

As much as I chuckle over any of Toyota's misfortunes, this news piece is about as newsorthy as the GM class action suit in Canada over the head gaskets: absolute BS until proven in court. Any idiot with 10 grand in the bank can grab a lawyer and sue for whatever they want. Almost any fishing expedition will result in some form of offer from the large corporation just to shut the "victim" up. Hell, if we ever had a Miss Goody TwoShoes start working in our workplace, we would all go to jail. "Sexual harassment" has become the new catch phrase of the bored and the failed. Didn't get a promotion? Sue your boss! Didn't get a raise? Sue the boss! Get an unfavorable Review? Sue the boss.

Being as I switch my main vehicle all the time, I can say from the point of view of considerable experience that the look of the plastics and the feel of the dash matter a lot less than the placement of storage cubbies, cupholders and whether the car has delayed locks, automatic headlights, etc. For example, GM's DAT cars don't have automatic headlights or delayed locks (including the fact that you absolutely must be out of the vehicle with the driver's door closed to even lock the doors, which drives me ABSOLUTELY BONKERS!) and this matters a helluva lot more than the fact that they have a nifty sunglass holder above the driver's door and the black vinyl dash cap/brushed metal looking dash is way better than the Malibu. The Malibu has so many clever features on it that it is a better vehicle (not to mention gas mileage) than the Optra or Aveo. And as you slip in and out of cars with electric or hydraulic steering, they also leave different impressions, which are deeply personal. I love the electric steering, but based on my observations on this board, electric steering is the worst thing to come along since the vinyl roof. I think we would agree that nothing is more subjective than the look/first impressions of the interior of a car. Fit is very important. Finish is subjective.

I just skip over these articles. I can't read them, what with all the cheering and bands playing and all. Anybody out there read "The End of Detroit?" I picked up that waste of cellulose the other day for $5.99 in a dust bin at the book store (where it belongs). I made it through about 20 pages before I put it away. Micheline Maynard is an old hag, who should pass up the dessert cart more often, by the looks of her picture. Some of the gems that made me gag before I threw it down: 1) On page 16, she claims that the luxury car market hasn't been led by Cadillac or Lincoln since 1986. ???WTF??? Isn't that the year the Legend came out? And she is saying that since that first shot, Cadillac and Lincoln were no longer #1? 2) She says the '98 Odyssey turned upside down the minivan market. More total BS. For Honda, it was a much better vehicle than the POS it replaced, but it was a flop on the market. The Caravan/Voyager, Windstar and even the Venture way outsold it. Now, the newer Odyssey is formidable, but the '98 was small, underpowered and over priced. That book reads like one, long PR piece for HOnda and Toyota. I wonder what service advisor pissed her off with her '86 Regal (just guessing). Anyway, my blood is already racing and I've barely finished my morning coffee. I don't know if Bloomberg owns a lot of stock in Toyota, but when their article starts of by saying that Toyota is the largest auto manufacturer by market value, you know the slant is going to be to slam GM all the way.

I could care less about the Camaro. Its only purpose may be to bring the odd person back to the GM fold, but I doubt it will be a high volume car anyway, especially with $5 a gallon gas looming on the horizon. I think it is safe to say GM is about 2 years late to this party. But I want to know how people think GM can ignore the $1,500 per car advantage Japan Inc. has over it while building high tech engines? While GM has to prop up the pension plan and is now the largest health provider in the U.S., what would you do as CEO? Cadillac and, I suppose, to an extent Buick should be cutting edge, but the Impala doesn't need to be state of the art. It just needs to be solid, good looking and a great value while being reliable. Most people don't know a pushrod from a push up, unless MT or CR tells them so.

Gas prices only have an impact on people who commute large distances. I only spend $10 a month more than I used to, because I only drive 1,000 km (600 miles) a month. Families who are going to be hit hard are the ones who BOTH commute 30+ miles each way. They can see their gas bills rise by a couple hundred a month! And many people with SUVs are using company gas cards and don't care.

Look who has thrown the thread off course by throwing in Wal-Mart, as if that is a valid argument. Japan Inc started off with cheap shoes and toys, then moved on to electronics and now have their sights set on the auto industry. Do you really think buying a $25 pair of tacky runners at Wal-Mart is in the same league as a $35,000 car???? REALLY? The defense department freaked when the last American TV manufacturer closed down and had to award a contract to Zenith just to keep them going and keep SOME of the technology in the U.S.! All this arguing about domestic/foreign content is bullcrap, plain and simple. Although it is a shame to lose the guys and gals on the line, or even the spin off parts jobs, it is the high end technical jobs that are the TRUE value-added jobs. The one area where America has really shone in the past 20 years has been in the IT/computers and communications, of which the American car manufacturers have been major buyers/contributors. Take that away from America and there will be no industrial complex left. The next Space Shuttle will be built in Japan and then we can argue about where the windshields and tires came from! Plain and simple: who is going to build the tanks and guns when China decides to take all the oil fields in Saudi Arabia? Will the future President call up the future Prime Minister of Japan and politely ask him if he can commandeer some Toyota plants to build tanks?

You know, bitching about power express up windows (perhaps GM's overzealous lawyers won't let them do it - some idiot might pinch their fingers and sue), and opinions about tacky plastics aside, does anybody here actually look at what the competition also lacks? I followed a brand new Infiniti yesterday in my underground and the damned thing's headlights weren't on! My '91 Caprice had automatic headlights! The new Cobalt has automatic headlights. I see so many damned imported cars with no headlights on underground, so this has made me think yet again - DOES GM BUILD AN INFERIOR CAR, OR IS BMW AND AUDI, ETC. BUILDING CARS THAT THE CRITICS WANT TO DRIVE? So while some of us prefer "ratcheted" adjustable steering, rather than the crappy Japanese style push-down-the-stupid-lever-find-the-right-spot-and-then-pull-up-the-stupid-lever-to-relock-it type adjusable column, that doesn't make Cadillac automatically inferior because it doesn't offer it.

I am sure Honda already had the manual tranny waiting for use in other markets. This is something GM needs to do more effectively, as we have discussed. As GM begins to use the same powertrains around the world, cost effectiveness will allow for use of manuals on more vehicles in more markets. I used to love to drive stick, too. but there is nothing glamorous or fun about driving in city traffic with a stick. And I am with rkmdogs on this one: I doubt anybody on this board could beat an automatic C-6 with a manual C-6. That takes a lot of skill and training. If you really want to ENJOY your vehicle, why stop at manual transmissions? What about power steering? NOW that is fun, fighting with a 3,600 lb vehicle with manual steering. And while we are at it, how about manual brakes, too? My friends '61 Fury was a JOY to drive with no power brakes or steering! Nothing can get the andrenylin rushing than trying to stop your BMW in traffic with no power brakes! That is fun! I think we should ditch power starters, too. Nothing like getting out on a cold winters' morning and cranking the old handle by the front bumper! NOw that is joy of driving!

The debate over the automatice versus manual transmission goes back to the very roots of the essence of American versus "European" design. Look at the Jaguars of the 1960s and then look at a '65 Impala SS. Two very different spins on what a sports car should be. They are also looking at a time when gas was (is) twice the price in Europe and when nobody but the Big Three knew how to make a decent automatic! Not much has changed. GM still (arguably) builds the best automatic in the world and with city driving likely to burn out a clutch in less than a 100k miles and a good automatic lasting well into the 250k miles - well, I think you catch my drift. I am sure nobody at GM wants to walk away from sales, but unless a good financial case can be made for the tooling costs of mating the manual tranny to the engines chosen..... Import buyers are a different breed and may not mind shifting, but I think a lot of their impressions are based on very bad experiences with automatics in the past. Even in small vehicles like the Aveo and Cobalt, manual sales is a very low total number. At our dealership, we probably sell less than 10% of these small cars with a manual. How would that go for a 200" family sedan?

FYI, in this market, a lot more Uplanders are sold than Tahoes or Trailblazers. Even though I would agree the Uplander is trailing other manufacturers, at $20k Canadian for the base model, it is fully $11k cheaper than the cheapest Sienna. Frankly, for the money it is a helluva deal. Cheaper than an HHR!!!!

Yeah, we've been talking about this at our dealer, too. We are going to skip the mass media (waste of time) and focus on ethnic group events, local flyers, direct sponsorship of events, etc. Better bang for the buck. Sellings cars is all about people anyway. Always has been. I've even streered quite a few people to C&G when they've expressed concern about GM's bankruptcy, etc. The local media here is pretty much hostile to GM, so our dealership has decided to not advertise there any more. We won't even allow the Wheels section of the Toronto Star in our waiting area any more! LOL

As a person who has been loudly proclaiming for a few years now that immigration in most Western countries needs to be curtailed and seriously reviewed, I am somewhat shocked how CNN and other news conglomerates are now jumping on this illegal immigration band wagon. Not so long ago, you were some kind of racist for even raising the issue. Now, because someone has waken up to the reality that there are literally MILLIONS of illegals amongst us, it has become fearsome. The French President got in some hot water a few years ago by declaring that what we are witnessing is a clash of cultures. He was referring to Islam and the way it tends to over run wherever it flourishes. Although I readily accept that immigration has historically been of mutual benefit for the host country and the immigrants, I don't believe that current immigrants have the same values and ideals in mind. They are not here to blend in and become Canadians or Americans. They are here to remain loyal to their own culture and only take what they can from us. When the Irish, Portuguese, Germans, Polish, etc. settled in North America over the past 100 years, they did not set about changing the values and culture of their host countries. Also, when Canadians and Americans birth rates were hovering in the 4-6% range, they were competitive with the immigrants coming here. However, current birth rates for North American born families is only around 1-2% (in Europe it is in the negative!), while the immigrants' birth rates are still in the 4-6% range. You do the math. The 40 million Hispanics in the U.S. today will likely become 80 million in 25 years, while the general U.S. population will not rise by much. I know that globalists believe that if we raise "emerging markets" to our level of standard of living (as we did with Japan and Korea), their labor costs will also rise to match ours, they will demand better work conditions, their birth rates will decline and their countries will stabalize. THAT IS THE THEORY. However, as we are seeing with many South American countries, Mexico and most of the Middle East, the rich tend to get richer, the poor poorer and social unrest INCREASES. We can expect more illegal immigration, more America-is-bad type hating and more political chaos in emerging markets.

The CTS is a laudable vehicle, but one that I doubt core Cadillac buyers would consider. I, myself, prefer larger vehicles and if I am going to pay $60k+ (and in Canada, all our vehicles are over-priced: SOMEBODY IS MAKING A KILLING ON THE NOW NEARLY PAR DOLLAR!!), I want a vehicle that rides, looks and feels like a Cadillac - or at least like I spent 60 grand. Again, coining the phrase "Tyranny of Enthusiasts," GM had better not forget its loyal core of 60+ drivers (my parents) who don't need to do .93 on a skidpad. I know I am going to earn the wrath of people on this board, but the BIGGEST mistake Cadillac ever made was in the late '80s when it downsized and made small Cadillacs. It is good to go after the BMW market with the CTS, but the DTS or Deville or whatever the hell you want to call it, should still be a large, luxurious Cadillac.

This problem isn't unique to the States. The Canadian government is also wringing its hands over illegals, too. They've recently cracked down (new government) on illegals and the bleeding heart newspapers are printing sob stories about families who've been here for years being rounded up and shipped out. My partner spent thousands of dollars to immigrate here LEGALLY from Brazil. Why should others live here, work for cash, send their kids to school for FREE, go to FREE clinics for medical attention, all the while paying NOTHING in taxes. Here's the rub: the loonie Left worries about illegals rights being violated, yet the conservative business elite are in the same bed because they want to continue to enjoy the downward pressure on labor costs that all the illegals bring. Strange bedfellows, indeed. The underground economy is far larger than anyone imagines. Mexico, and countries like her, need this relief valve to get rid of their malcontents, who would otherwise be agitating at home for better working conditions and more jobs!

Too soon to tell. Everybody is posturing at this point. Hopefully cooler heads will prevail. GM and others have already anticipated this move. We are living in interesting times.

But the Camry is "best selling" because if you walk into a Toyota store, you have no choice but to buy one. Look at what GM has done with the large cars: first the Grand Prix in 2004, then the Allure in 2005 and then the Impala. Each model arguably better than the previous. GM building on learning experiences from the predecessor. Don't like the Impala? Look at the Malibu or the G-6 or the Allure. Don't like the Camry? Tough. Don't like the Accord? Too bad. Sure, maybe Toyota can make more money off one model, but if GM can take advantage of platform sharing and do it well (unlike the LeSabre/88 BS of 15 years ago), then the advantage goes to GM.

I agree that Chrysler has built its recent reputation around big, brutish cars and trucks, but when the U.S. hits $5 a gallon (say Katrina anyone?) there will be a lot of hemi engines sitting on the lots. Chrysler is particularly weak in the fuel mileage department. The 300 and Charger are not going to win any economy awards. The critics bitch about GM's reliance on the new full-size SUVs for profitablility, but at least with the GM-DAT product and the decent mileage figures for the Malibu and Impala, GM is ready for higher priced gasoline. With the new Aveo (second generation!) hitting the lots soon and rumours of a small Korean-based SUV coming, GM should be in good shape in the mileage wars. I mean when someone trades in their Liberty because their mother's Envoy gets better gas mileage, you know there is a problem.

What they said. I have had one complaint on the radio problem, too. A customer bought a 2005 Cobalt in October and contacted me twice about the radio cutting out for no apparent reason. He brought it in for service. I am not sure what they did, but it hasn't done it since.