February 2016: General Motors Co.

[Drew Dowdell]

Chevrolet Remains the Industry’s Fastest-Growing Full-Line Brand, with 11 Consecutive Months of Growth

 

·         Retail sales for GM and Chevrolet have increased year over year every month since April 2015

·         February retail sales up 13 percent for Chevrolet, estimated share up 1 percentage point

·         GM retail sales up 7 percent in February, estimated share up 0.4 percentage points

·         Cadillac retail sales up 4 percent in February

·         Buick total sales up 2 percent

·         GMC sets ATP record for February

·         Commercial deliveries up for 28^th consecutive month

 

 

DETROIT – General Motors (NYSE: GM) continued to grow its retail sales and market share in February, a trend that began April 2015. Since then, retail deliveries have been up every month compared to a year ago, and retail market share has been up in 10 of 12 months. February retail deliveries totaled 179,958 units, up 7 percent. GM’s estimated retail share is up 0.4 percentage points.

 

The Chevrolet brand remained the industry’s fastest-growing full line brand in February, with retail deliveries climbing 13 percent compared to a year ago. Estimated retail share is up 1 percentage point on a year-over-year basis. In addition, Cadillac retail deliveries were up 4 percent.

 

“Our strategy is simple: grow profitable retail share while maintaining discipline with inventory levels and incentive spending, while reducing rental deliveries,” said Kurt McNeil, GM’s U.S. vice president of sales operations.

 

Due to a planned reduction in rental deliveries, GM’s total sales of 227,825 were down slightly year over year. GM reduced daily rental deliveries by about 16,500 units, or 39 percent in February. GM grew its Commercial business in February for the 28^th consecutive month.  

 

GM expects to operate with about a 70-days supply of vehicles throughout the year in most months, with some months higher or lower. February month-end inventories were at a 67-days supply. GM continues to grow retail market share with incentives below domestic companies and other key competitors.

 

 

As a result of lower rental deliveries, GM expects its fleet mix in 2016 to be about 20 percent of total sales, compared with a historical range of 22 to 24 percent. In 2015, GM reduced rental deliveries by about 50,000 units compared to 2014. In the first two months of 2016, rental deliveries are down about 30,000 units, compared to a year ago.

 

“The redesign of our full-size pickups and SUVs, and the smart bets we made to enter the small crossover and mid-size pickup segments with vehicles like the Chevrolet Trax and Colorado couldn’t have been timed better,” McNeil said. “The economy is growing, Millennials are becoming a major force in the market and we’re doing everything we can to meet retail demand, including increased production of mid-size pickups and investing in additional V8 engine capacity.”

 

Millennials (customers under age 34) now buy more new vehicles than any generation besides Baby Boomers, and they account for 20 percent of GM sales, up from 5 percent in 2010.

 

GM’s products plans are tailored to these generational shifts. Redesigned vehicles launching in 2016, including Chevrolet Cruze, Volt, Camaro, Malibu and Trax. At the same time, Buick is expanding its portfolio with the Cascada convertible and Envision crossover, GMC is launching an all-new Acadia crossover, and Cadillac is launching the all-new CT6 prestige sedan and XT5 crossover.

 

“We continue to be optimistic about the continued strength of the U.S. economy,” said Mustafa Mohatarem, GM’s chief economist. “Employment remains strong, interest rates remain at historically low levels and gas prices are stable, so we expect auto sales to remain strong for the foreseeable future.”

February Retail Sales and Business Highlights vs. 2015 (except as noted)

 

Chevrolet

·         Chevrolet had its best February sales since 2007, with cars up 34 percent, crossovers up 5 percent and trucks up 3 percent.

·         Malibu was up 87 percent for the model’s best February since at least 1979.

·         Camaro, Cruze and Impala were up 39 percent, 27 percent and 14 percent, respectively. Volt was up 96 percent.

·         Suburban, Tahoe, Traverse and Trax were up 36 percent, 22 percent, 15 percent and 26 percent, respectively.

·         Suburban and Tahoe had their best February since 2008.

 

GMC

·         Yukon sales were up 12 percent.

·         GMC continues to earn the highest average transaction prices (ATPs) among its competitive set. February ATPs of $42,300 were a record for the month.

·         Denali trim penetration was the highest ever at 24 percent.

 

Buick

·         Encore and Enclave sales were up 26 percent and 6 percent, respectively. Encore achieved best ever February sales.

·         Buick’s total sales were up 2 percent.

 

Cadillac

·         Escalade and SRX sales were up 22 percent and 13 percent, respectively.

 

Average Transaction Prices/Incentives (J.D. Power PIN estimates)

·         ATPs, which reflect transaction prices after incentives, were approximately $34,200 in February, up about $680 from January and more than $3,600 above the industry average.

·         GM’s incentive spending as a percentage of ATP was 12.4 percent, which reflects lower year-over-year spending on trucks and higher spending on passenger cars being replaced with all-new designs. Industry average spending in February was 11.1 percent.

 

Fleet and Commercial

·         Commercial sales grew 7 percent year over year in February and for the calendar year to date, after growing 38 percent from 2013 to 2015.

·         Government sales were up 14 percent year over year in February, and 3 percent calendar year to date.

 

Industry Sales

·         GM estimates that the seasonally adjusted annual selling rate (SAAR) for light vehicles in February was 17.7 million units.

 

	February				(Calendar Year-to-Date)
					January - February
	2016	2015	%Change Volume		2016	2015	%Change Volume
Cascada	495	0	***.*		583	0	***.*
Enclave	4,126	3,620	14.0		7,818	7,117	9.8
Encore	5,873	4,921	19.3		10,793	8,386	28.7
LaCrosse	2,643	3,751	-29.5		6,700	5,774	16.0
Regal	1,608	1,689	-4.8		4,261	2,481	71.7
Verano	3,066	3,437	-10.8		5,925	6,213	-4.6
Buick Total	17,811	17,418	2.3		36,080	29,971	20.4
ATS	1,591	2,028	-21.5		2,658	3,785	-29.8
CTS	1,461	1,438	1.6		2,474	3,136	-21.1
ELR	91	127	-28.3		158	219	-27.9
Escalade	1,820	1,489	22.2		3,047	3,153	-3.4
Escalade ESV	1,047	888	17.9		1,822	1,988	-8.4
SRX	4,017	3,809	5.5		8,795	7,294	20.6
XTS	1,813	1,960	-7.5		3,626	3,842	-5.6
Cadillac Total	11,840	11,739	0.9		22,580	23,419	-3.6
Camaro	6,151	6,373	-3.5		11,702	11,364	3.0
Caprice	71	98	-27.6		92	222	-58.6
Captiva Sport	0	13	***.*		0	23	***.*
City Express	734	605	21.3		1,444	1,190	21.3
Colorado	7,394	6,563	12.7		12,902	12,505	3.2
Corvette	2,116	2,605	-18.8		3,617	4,732	-23.6
Cruze	12,998	18,301	-29.0		27,360	36,994	-26.0
Equinox	19,825	21,723	-8.7		38,399	41,278	-7.0
Express	4,311	3,222	33.8		7,224	6,804	6.2
Impala	9,147	9,065	0.9		19,089	18,279	4.4
Malibu	21,418	13,971	53.3		36,164	25,849	39.9
Silverado-C/K Pickup	43,136	45,395	-5.0		80,999	81,501	-0.6
Sonic	4,241	2,900	46.2		7,919	6,421	23.3
Spark	1,761	2,674	-34.1		2,882	5,844	-50.7
Suburban (Chevy)	3,584	4,436	-19.2		6,854	8,566	-20.0
SS	165	215	-23.3		253	330	-23.3
Tahoe	6,494	7,410	-12.4		12,693	14,017	-9.4
Traverse	9,158	9,705	-5.6		16,172	19,856	-18.6
Trax	4,814	3,821	26.0		8,560	5,660	51.2
Volt	1,126	693	62.5		2,122	1,235	71.8
Chevrolet Total	158,644	159,788	-0.7		296,447	302,670	-2.1
Acadia	6,972	7,061	-1.3		12,357	12,959	-4.6
Canyon	2,440	2,513	-2.9		4,710	4,718	-0.2
Savana	1,380	1,999	-31.0		2,880	3,488	-17.4
Sierra	15,202	15,157	0.3		29,583	27,778	6.5
Terrain	8,232	10,859	-24.2		17,067	19,703	-13.4
Yukon	3,024	2,796	8.2		5,591	5,445	2.7
Yukon XL	2,280	2,048	11.3		4,275	4,013	6.5
GMC Total	39,530	42,433	-6.8		76,463	78,104	-2.1
GM Vehicle Total	227,825	231,378	-1.5		431,570	434,164	-0.6
24 selling days for the February period this year and 24 for last year.

 

[ccap41]

Wow, the new Malibu appears to have taken off very well! Seeing it slightly more often and the previous Malibu often enough, the new one looks pretty dang good in comparison. I didn't like it initially but it's growing on me.

 

The brand growth thing kind of confuses me when I see a negative from this year to last year for the Chevrolet name. 

[Drew Dowdell]

I'm not sure why they're even bothering with Caprice.  

[surreal1272]

My question is why are the Camaro numbers so low? Are there production issues keeping the numbers down? Hell, it barely beat the Challenger last month.

Edited March 1, 2016 by surreal1272

[surreal1272]

Wow, the new Malibu appears to have taken off very well! Seeing it slightly more often and the previous Malibu often enough, the new one looks pretty dang good in comparison. I didn't like it initially but it's growing on me.

 

The brand growth thing kind of confuses me when I see a negative from this year to last year for the Chevrolet name. 

The negative result is because of the big reduction in rental numbers.

 

"As a result of lower rental deliveries, GM expects its fleet mix in 2016 to be about 20 percent of total sales, compared with a historical range of 22 to 24 percent. In 2015, GM reduced rental deliveries by about 50,000 units compared to 2014. In the first two months of 2016, rental deliveries are down about 30,000 units, compared to a year ago."

[ccap41]

 

Wow, the new Malibu appears to have taken off very well! Seeing it slightly more often and the previous Malibu often enough, the new one looks pretty dang good in comparison. I didn't like it initially but it's growing on me.

 

The brand growth thing kind of confuses me when I see a negative from this year to last year for the Chevrolet name. 

The negative result is because of the big reduction in rental numbers.

 

"As a result of lower rental deliveries, GM expects its fleet mix in 2016 to be about 20 percent of total sales, compared with a historical range of 22 to 24 percent. In 2015, GM reduced rental deliveries by about 50,000 units compared to 2014. In the first two months of 2016, rental deliveries are down about 30,000 units, compared to a year ago."

 

I don't think it matter what the reason behind the negative is, less vehicles were sold, period. Right?  How can the claim of "fastest growing full-line brand" when your overall sales are down from last year's? 

 

It's honestly confusing to me. If somebody can make it make sense in my head for me I would appreciate that! 

Edited March 1, 2016 by ccap41

[Drew Dowdell]

 

 

Wow, the new Malibu appears to have taken off very well! Seeing it slightly more often and the previous Malibu often enough, the new one looks pretty dang good in comparison. I didn't like it initially but it's growing on me.

 

The brand growth thing kind of confuses me when I see a negative from this year to last year for the Chevrolet name. 

The negative result is because of the big reduction in rental numbers.

 

"As a result of lower rental deliveries, GM expects its fleet mix in 2016 to be about 20 percent of total sales, compared with a historical range of 22 to 24 percent. In 2015, GM reduced rental deliveries by about 50,000 units compared to 2014. In the first two months of 2016, rental deliveries are down about 30,000 units, compared to a year ago."

 

I don't think it matter what the reason behind the negative is, less vehicles were sold, period. Right?  How can the claim of "fastest growing full-line brand" when your overall sales are down from last year's? 

 

It's honestly confusing to me. If somebody can make it make sense in my head for me I would appreciate that! 

 

 

While it's not clear in the release, I'm sure they are referring to retail sales in their growth. 

[ccap41]

 

 

 

Wow, the new Malibu appears to have taken off very well! Seeing it slightly more often and the previous Malibu often enough, the new one looks pretty dang good in comparison. I didn't like it initially but it's growing on me.

 

The brand growth thing kind of confuses me when I see a negative from this year to last year for the Chevrolet name. 

The negative result is because of the big reduction in rental numbers.

 

"As a result of lower rental deliveries, GM expects its fleet mix in 2016 to be about 20 percent of total sales, compared with a historical range of 22 to 24 percent. In 2015, GM reduced rental deliveries by about 50,000 units compared to 2014. In the first two months of 2016, rental deliveries are down about 30,000 units, compared to a year ago."

 

I don't think it matter what the reason behind the negative is, less vehicles were sold, period. Right?  How can the claim of "fastest growing full-line brand" when your overall sales are down from last year's? 

 

It's honestly confusing to me. If somebody can make it make sense in my head for me I would appreciate that! 

 

 

While it's not clear in the release, I'm sure they are referring to retail sales in their growth. 

 

It would have been nice if they cleared it up when showing a negative overall.. At least for the shareholders. I know if I had shares and saw this release I would just be confused..and want to know 'what's up?' Not like it is a bad thing, It just doesn't make sense.

[surreal1272]

 

 

Wow, the new Malibu appears to have taken off very well! Seeing it slightly more often and the previous Malibu often enough, the new one looks pretty dang good in comparison. I didn't like it initially but it's growing on me.

 

The brand growth thing kind of confuses me when I see a negative from this year to last year for the Chevrolet name. 

The negative result is because of the big reduction in rental numbers.

 

"As a result of lower rental deliveries, GM expects its fleet mix in 2016 to be about 20 percent of total sales, compared with a historical range of 22 to 24 percent. In 2015, GM reduced rental deliveries by about 50,000 units compared to 2014. In the first two months of 2016, rental deliveries are down about 30,000 units, compared to a year ago."

 

I don't think it matter what the reason behind the negative is, less vehicles were sold, period. Right?  How can the claim of "fastest growing full-line brand" when your overall sales are down from last year's? 

 

It's honestly confusing to me. If somebody can make it make sense in my head for me I would appreciate that! 

 

Well, for starters there is more profit per retail uni sold than fleet or rental unit. If you are at least offsetting your overall sales (and GM is right now) numbers with that formula, then that means more profit, which I hear is a good thing (or at least that's what Ford fans always say ).

[Drew Dowdell]

 

 

 

Wow, the new Malibu appears to have taken off very well! Seeing it slightly more often and the previous Malibu often enough, the new one looks pretty dang good in comparison. I didn't like it initially but it's growing on me.

 

The brand growth thing kind of confuses me when I see a negative from this year to last year for the Chevrolet name. 

The negative result is because of the big reduction in rental numbers.

 

"As a result of lower rental deliveries, GM expects its fleet mix in 2016 to be about 20 percent of total sales, compared with a historical range of 22 to 24 percent. In 2015, GM reduced rental deliveries by about 50,000 units compared to 2014. In the first two months of 2016, rental deliveries are down about 30,000 units, compared to a year ago."

 

I don't think it matter what the reason behind the negative is, less vehicles were sold, period. Right?  How can the claim of "fastest growing full-line brand" when your overall sales are down from last year's? 

 

It's honestly confusing to me. If somebody can make it make sense in my head for me I would appreciate that! 

 

Well, for starters there is more profit per retail uni sold than fleet or rental unit. If you are at least offsetting your overall sales (and GM is right now) numbers with that formula, then that means more profit, which I hear is a good thing (or at least that's what Ford fans always say ).

 

 

Profitability over Volume, but great when you can get both. 

[surreal1272]

 

 

 

 

Wow, the new Malibu appears to have taken off very well! Seeing it slightly more often and the previous Malibu often enough, the new one looks pretty dang good in comparison. I didn't like it initially but it's growing on me.

 

The brand growth thing kind of confuses me when I see a negative from this year to last year for the Chevrolet name. 

The negative result is because of the big reduction in rental numbers.

 

"As a result of lower rental deliveries, GM expects its fleet mix in 2016 to be about 20 percent of total sales, compared with a historical range of 22 to 24 percent. In 2015, GM reduced rental deliveries by about 50,000 units compared to 2014. In the first two months of 2016, rental deliveries are down about 30,000 units, compared to a year ago."

 

I don't think it matter what the reason behind the negative is, less vehicles were sold, period. Right?  How can the claim of "fastest growing full-line brand" when your overall sales are down from last year's? 

 

It's honestly confusing to me. If somebody can make it make sense in my head for me I would appreciate that! 

 

Well, for starters there is more profit per retail uni sold than fleet or rental unit. If you are at least offsetting your overall sales (and GM is right now) numbers with that formula, then that means more profit, which I hear is a good thing (or at least that's what Ford fans always say ).

 

 

Profitability over Volume, but great when you can get both. 

 

Not disagreeing with that but they are correcting a past wrong of putting volume over more sustainable profits per unit. The results are positive thus far IMO but they still have a long way to go.

[smk4565]

My question is why are the Camaro numbers so low? Are there production issues keeping the numbers down? Hell, it barely beat the Challenger last month.

Because the Camaro is not a crossover. Seriously though, I think it will do better in warm weather months. A problem with the Camaro is it hard to see out of or get in and out of.

[Suaviloquent]

I sat in the new Camaro at the autoshow, finally.

 

I'm heartbroken. It looks great, but you sit in it, and it's a bunker. If you can live with, that's great. I said it before - I would not drive a Camaro in the city, but anywhere else, for sure.

 

The interior is on par with its competition, looks a bit more interesting than say an M2 for sure. 

[surreal1272]

 

My question is why are the Camaro numbers so low? Are there production issues keeping the numbers down? Hell, it barely beat the Challenger last month.

Because the Camaro is not a crossover. Seriously though, I think it will do better in warm weather months. A problem with the Camaro is it hard to see out of or get in and out of.

 

I don't think it's that hard to see out of personally, but I get the consensus. However, that view (which is worse in the older model btw) did not stop the last one form selling better than this. 

[smk4565]

The market keeps shifting away from anything with 2 doors. They are fortunate to sell as many Camaros as they do.

Remember not long ago when there was G6, Alero/Grand am, Monte Carlo, Sebring, Solara, Altima, Celica, and Cobalt coupes. They are all dead, and that happened in 10 years.

[surreal1272]

The market keeps shifting away from anything with 2 doors. They are fortunate to sell as many Camaros as they do.

Remember not long ago when there was G6, Alero/Grand am, Monte Carlo, Sebring, Solara, Altima, Celica, and Cobalt coupes. They are all dead, and that happened in 10 years.

That's because those were FWD pretenders in sporty disguise and people caught on to that. You also fail to see that your premise hasn't hurt Mustang sales and it shouldn't hurt here, which is why I originally asked about any production issues. Nothing else you say really applies unless you can answer that specific question.

Edited March 2, 2016 by surreal1272

[Robert Hall]

I sat in a new Camaro at Barrett-Jackson...black bunker inside..tiny pill box side windows, low roof (my head was rubbing the headliner), undersized side mirrors, relatively wide car w/ long doors would be a pain in the ass in my real world office parking garage (assigned space underground)...

 

The interior materials and fit and finish seemed better than the 5th gen's Fisher Price interior, though. 

Edited March 2, 2016 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Cmicasa the Great]

My question is why are the Camaro numbers so low? Are there production issues keeping the numbers down? Hell, it barely beat the Challenger last month.

 

 

 

We just came off a blizzard.. just 4 weeks ago in the east. After that.... another minor snow storm of 4 inches. Plus.. the production has to be ramped up due to going from the ATS.. then CTS.. now the Camaro at Lansing. I bet good money that CTS sales, BTW, are directly affected by VSeries introduction. Furthermore there are no convertible Camaros avail yet.. not to mention 2.0L Turbos for that cost effect. Mustang inventory is 2X that of Camaro as well at this point '16 vs '16s

[Suaviloquent]

I sat in a new Camaro at Barrett-Jackson...black bunker inside..tiny pill box side windows, low roof (my head was rubbing the headliner), undersized side mirrors, relatively wide car w/ long doors would be a pain in the ass in my real world office parking garage (assigned space underground)...

 

The interior materials and fit and finish seemed better than the 5th gen's Fisher Price interior, though. 

 

Yeah. Same impression. It drives awesome as per magazine reviews. But it just isn't a practical car, and me saying it is redundant, but I think because of styling and aero and safety, coupes have become even more impractical, especially for urban driving.

 

But yeah, I think for the person trying to justify a coupe purchase as say a daily driver but second vehicle....it's a bigger detractor than most will think.

 

I really like the new Malibu. But I cannot resolve how the front end looks. But to reconcile that issue I reminded myself that driving the car, I wouldn't be looking at its weird front end. So the rest of the car is tasty and lickable. 

[Robert Hall]

I'm funny about coupes..I've had a few, had them as my primary car most of the time through my 20s (and a 2dr SUV for winter)..wasn't until my 30s that I starting primarily driving 4drs and 5drs...in my 20s, I was parking outside at school then work, so lots of space for long doors..practical took a back seat to the fun of a 5.0 Mustang...     But in living in larger cities and parking in garages mostly for work, a 4dr/5dr works so much better than a long doored two door w/ tiny windows...and 80s-90s coupes had so much better outward visibility..

 

Though I can see having another coupe sooner or later as a 2nd/3rd car for fun.

Edited March 2, 2016 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Suaviloquent]

The rest of the new Chevy line-up is shaping to be one of the most complete and compelling that GM has had for Chevy in a while.

 

Though I will say, the new Cruze, outside of the RS appearance package looks about what I'd expect from a compact car, as in I see nothing that really sets it apart that much.

[Robert Hall]

 

 

I really like the new Malibu. But I cannot resolve how the front end looks. But to reconcile that issue I reminded myself that driving the car, I wouldn't be looking at its weird front end. So the rest of the car is tasty and lickable. 

 

I've found the Malibu front end looks better in dark colors, and with a license plate (which they generally don't have here).   The Malibu front end reminds me too much of the current Avalon (albeit w/ different detailing). 

[ocnblu]

If GM expects to really test demand for midsize trucks, they're going to have to build more trucks.  The hoary, and horrible looking, old Tacoma continues to clean their clock in sales, and it is getting worse, not better.

[Cmicasa the Great]

[Cmicasa the Great]

interesting... 

 

 

While Ford Motor’s retail sales rose 11 percent, its fleet deliveries surged more than 40 percent. The number of vehicles the automaker sold to car-rental companies -- transactions that are generally less profitable than other fleet sales -- nearly doubled last month, to about 41,000 units.

In contrast, General Motors said it cut rental-car deliveries in February by 39 percent, or 16,500 units.

Autonews

[El Kabong]

I'm guessing there are a LOT of V6 Mustangs in that count. It's the main reason why I'm not too concerned about the Camaro "only" moving 6-7,000 units per month.

[Drew Dowdell]

I'm guessing there are a LOT of V6 Mustangs in that count. It's the main reason why I'm not too concerned about the Camaro "only" moving 6-7,000 units per month.

 

All of my Mustang rentals have been the Ecoboost 4.

[El Kabong]

Point taken on the engine, but the gist of my argument is still valid.

I will say that your experience is probably a wake-up call for Ford as far as their attempt to make the EcoBoost appear to be a premium engine.

[Drew Dowdell]

Well, to be fair, all of the mustangs I've rented have been really premium models.  Heated/Cooled seats, convertibles, leather, etc. 

[ccap41]

lol look at bong trying his damnedest to backhand Ford.   

 

Bong:      (pretend it's a rental, v6 ,convertible mustang) 

[El Kabong]

I'm guessing there are a LOT of V6 Mustangs in that count. It's the main reason why I'm not too concerned about the Camaro "only" moving 6-7,000 units per month.

Just a reminder that I was downvoted by someone for pointing out what had already been widely reported: GM is currently doing a lot less fleet sales than the competition.

Sorry if feelings were hurt. But that's just the way it is

[Lamar]

Rentals may be a factor, yeah, but remember that fleet numbers include municipal and commercial sales too.

 

I don't know how many police cars GM is selling since they don't break those out, but I'd bet a dollar that, looking at van deliveries, Ford is eating GM's lunch in commercial sales.  I see Transits absolutely everywhere.

[G. David Felt]

Rentals may be a factor, yeah, but remember that fleet numbers include municipal and commercial sales too.

 

I don't know how many police cars GM is selling since they don't break those out, but I'd bet a dollar that, looking at van deliveries, Ford is eating GM's lunch in commercial sales.  I see Transits absolutely everywhere.

That is interesting and must be a regional thing as I see transits but not in the numbers compared to the ugly new RAM van and GM's Vans especially their new Chevy mini van. That thing is everywhere around Seattle.

[ccap41]

 

Rentals may be a factor, yeah, but remember that fleet numbers include municipal and commercial sales too.

 

I don't know how many police cars GM is selling since they don't break those out, but I'd bet a dollar that, looking at van deliveries, Ford is eating GM's lunch in commercial sales.  I see Transits absolutely everywhere.

That is interesting and must be a regional thing as I see transits but not in the numbers compared to the ugly new RAM van and GM's Vans especially their new Chevy mini van. That thing is everywhere around Seattle.

 

We're more Transits here as well. Transits and the ugh-oh Ram. But it appears to me more of the Transit Connect and Transits here. Well, there are a lot of the Connects here for sure. I rarely see either other other two smaller work vans.

[G. David Felt]

Has anyone seen the Nissan Van's? Seattle has gotten a bunch of them as Taxis and I have seen a few of the nissans as works vans and only seen retail sitting on the lot. Course they are never advertised so I wonder if anyone even knows about them. GM has also done a piss poor job of advertising the mini van.

[Drew Dowdell]

Lots of Transit Connects here, not many Transits but they're growing.  Lots more Promasters and a bunch of old Sprinters.... GM still rules the roost on big vans here, but not sure how much longer.

 

I've seen one single Chevy City Express.

[ccap41]

Has anyone seen the Nissan Van? Seattle has gotten a bunch of them as Taxis and I have seen a few of the nissans as works vans and only seen retail sitting on the lot. Course they are never advertised so I wonder if anyone even knows about them. GM has also done a piss poor job of advertising the mini van.

The big one, right? 

 

I've seen only a few. Actually, probably just a tad less than the Ram. I don't see near as many of the 2500/250's as I do the small Transit Connects and slowly seeing more of the little Chevy vans as well. 

[G. David Felt]

 

Has anyone seen the Nissan Van? Seattle has gotten a bunch of them as Taxis and I have seen a few of the nissans as works vans and only seen retail sitting on the lot. Course they are never advertised so I wonder if anyone even knows about them. GM has also done a piss poor job of advertising the mini van.

The big one, right? 

 

I've seen only a few. Actually, probably just a tad less than the Ram. I don't see near as many of the 2500/250's as I do the small Transit Connects and slowly seeing more of the little Chevy vans as well. 

 

Sorry, ment to have it plural to cover both. But yea the big one in addition to the small one.

[surreal1272]

 

I'm guessing there are a LOT of V6 Mustangs in that count. It's the main reason why I'm not too concerned about the Camaro "only" moving 6-7,000 units per month.

 

All of my Mustang rentals have been the Ecoboost 4.

 

But that varies area to area. Most in the Phoenix area are V6 with a few Eco-Boosts sprinkled in for flavor.

Edited March 4, 2016 by surreal1272

[Lamar]

 

Rentals may be a factor, yeah, but remember that fleet numbers include municipal and commercial sales too.

 

I don't know how many police cars GM is selling since they don't break those out, but I'd bet a dollar that, looking at van deliveries, Ford is eating GM's lunch in commercial sales.  I see Transits absolutely everywhere.

That is interesting and must be a regional thing as I see transits but not in the numbers compared to the ugly new RAM van and GM's Vans especially their new Chevy mini van. That thing is everywhere around Seattle.

 

 

Thankfully, I haven't seen very many Promasters around my way (NC).  But I have seen a few more of those than the small GM vans.

[surreal1272]

 

 

I'm guessing there are a LOT of V6 Mustangs in that count. It's the main reason why I'm not too concerned about the Camaro "only" moving 6-7,000 units per month.

 

All of my Mustang rentals have been the Ecoboost 4.

 

But that varies area to area. Most in the Phoenix area are V6 with a few Eco-Boosts sprinkled in for flavor.

 

Never mind. 

Edited March 7, 2016 by surreal1272

[surreal1272]

Well, it turns out that there is a good reason for the relatively low sales start for the Camaro. No 4 cylinder until now (which will certainly account for a large amount of sales). 

 

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-chevrolet-camaro-convertible-20-turbo-first-drive-review/

[ocnblu]

This 2.0t is no Iron Duke.  I think it will do well in the car.  The yutes will love it, and hopefully it will be tuneable.

[El Kabong]

In all honesty I think I prefer the 2.0T over the 3.6 for just that reason. I'm all for a more refined ponycar, but the idea of bolting on a turbo as big as a melon and hooning BRXs is just too awesome to ignore.

[ccap41]

In all honesty I think I prefer the 2.0T over the 3.6 for just that reason. I'm all for a more refined ponycar, but the idea of bolting on a turbo as big as a melon and hooning BRXs is just too awesome to ignore.

I don't think it would be any easier to bolt on a massive turbo to the 2.0 as it would the 3.6 because everything would have to change in terms of piping and intercooling anyway.

[Cmicasa the Great]

Well, it turns out that there is a good reason for the relatively low sales start for the Camaro. No 4 cylinder until now (which will certainly account for a large amount of sales). 

 

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-chevrolet-camaro-convertible-20-turbo-first-drive-review/

 

 

I told U this in POST #18 of this very thread... 

[El Kabong]

In all honesty I think I prefer the 2.0T over the 3.6 for just that reason. I'm all for a more refined ponycar, but the idea of bolting on a turbo as big as a melon and hooning BRXs is just too awesome to ignore.

I don't think it would be any easier to bolt on a massive turbo to the 2.0 as it would the 3.6 because everything would have to change in terms of piping and intercooling anyway.

Lot easier to upgrade a turbo (and associated plumbing) than put one (or two) on a NA engine, especially one that takes up more underhood space.

[surreal1272]

 

Well, it turns out that there is a good reason for the relatively low sales start for the Camaro. No 4 cylinder until now (which will certainly account for a large amount of sales). 

 

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-chevrolet-camaro-convertible-20-turbo-first-drive-review/

 

 

I told U this in POST #18 of this very thread... 

 

Excuse me for not reading every single post as this article JUST came out Casa. Good grief man. After my initial question, I didn't come back to this page for a while. Sue me.

Edited March 12, 2016 by surreal1272

[Cmicasa the Great]

 

 

Well, it turns out that there is a good reason for the relatively low sales start for the Camaro. No 4 cylinder until now (which will certainly account for a large amount of sales). 

 

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-chevrolet-camaro-convertible-20-turbo-first-drive-review/

 

 

I told U this in POST #18 of this very thread... 

 

Excuse me for not reading every single post as this article JUST came out Casa. Good grief man. After my initial question, I didn't come back to this page for a while. Sue me.

 

 

 

Jeeez. Think U need to slow your roll. I was just pointing out.. didn't think U would take it as if I was coming down on U. Relax

[Drew Dowdell]

Well, it turns out that there is a good reason for the relatively low sales start for the Camaro. No 4 cylinder until now (which will certainly account for a large amount of sales). 

 

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-chevrolet-camaro-convertible-20-turbo-first-drive-review/

 

Oh, I wasn't even aware that they weren't rolling those yet.  Yeah, no base engine will eat into sales.