Why GM is Failing BADLY!!!

Page 2 of 3  


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Do your own homework, WBMA ;)
mike hunt

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You the one making the claim that there is no difference in the three distinct different digits assign to cars built, or merely assembled in the US. Even the slightest bit of logic on your part should make you suspect that there is a reason for three, rather than just one as is the case with Canada and Mexico. I explained the differ to you, but you choose to believe what you want. That is your prerogative..
mike hunt

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Because '1' is assigned to cars and trucks actually made in the US with over 70% US content. '2' is assigned to all cars and trucks made in Canada, regardless of US content, and '3' to Mexico, regardless of US content . You get an 'F' on your homework so will continue to believe what you want I supose ;)
mike hunt

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You sure want to continue to believe what you believe don't you. Why do you think there would be a need for more first digits? VINs are not sequential numbers that could run out of because of volume. The only part of the VIN that is sequential are the last several numbers of the various model distinctive VINs based in production volume of that model. VINs restart every year for every manufacture and vary with body styles, SRS systems, engine, plants, check digit etc.
mike hunt

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You really are trying hard to continue to believe what you want to believe. I had addressed the Navigator in a previous post, too much non US Content, Canadian interior, dash, trim and other parts. The Aviator has a '4' for the same reason.
mike hunt

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Oh, come on. The interior in most GM cars is tacky, plasticky crap. The engines sound like they're getting ready to fall apart. I have less than 28K miles on my company Impala and there's more nasty mechanical clattery noises from under the hood than on my old Porsche with 150K miles! The A/C compressor alone makes the most alarming sounds. The whole car just feels like, well, crap. Compare and contrast with the '02 GTI that I sold a while back with 40K on the clock that had high quality materials used throughout and sounded like the day I drove it home from the dealership... if you can say with a straight face that there is no difference in quality, all I can say is, step away from the crack pipe. And let's not even get into ergonomics... why do I have to fold myself up like a pretzel to get my feet out of a full sized 4-door sedan when the driver's seat is adjusted to a comfortable driving position? It's easier to get in and out of my 944, for crying out loud! and the asinine "kick to release" parking brake ensures that I won't have a single pair of dress shoes without a big scuff on the outside of the left shoe, not to mention the beating the kick panel takes when the sole catches underneath the bottom of it. How about that cheap multifunction turn signal switch? gotta love that... and the doors that won't stay open on anything resembling an incline; just try getting out of the car while carrying a cup of coffee and a roll of blueprints... (there's a big coffee stain on the driver's door panel from trying just this maneuver.) I could go on for hours about all the things I LOATHE about this car. I can only hope that the redesigned '06 models are better, otherwise GM DESERVES to die.
Unfortunately for GM, it would seem that a lot of people in power over there think just like you do, that consumers can't tell the difference. I don't think I'm particularly picky, really, I just don't see that there's any excuse for anyone to charge over $20K for such a bloody awful vehicle when a base model Hyundai is nicer to drive and feels to be of better quality overall.
The sad thing is, in the late '60s GM made some really great cars. I would dearly love to have my dad's '67 Cutlass today; that car was a tank. over 300K miles were on it when it went to the big parking lot in the sky, and the only reason it went was because the frame was rotted out from too many Pennsylvania winters. Other than a carb that really needed a full reman (after 300K miles? you don't say,) there wasn't a thing mechanically wrong with the car, and say what you will about vinyl interiors, but it still looked darn good inside. If I had to keep this POS Impala as long as my dad kept that Cutlass, I'd probably start taking the bus. I don't know what the hell happened to GM, but somewhere along the line they started counting beans too much and forgetting that they were in business not only to make money, but to actually design functional transportation for real human beings.
nate
Mike Hunter wrote:

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You are right. The bean counters (dudes with spreadsheets on their laptops) have taken over and have managed to extract much of the quality out of the cars. They're short sighted. They're focused on saving a buck or 2 NOW instead of building quality cars that people will want to buy now and in the future. Long sighted planning means building quality products to ensure a future customer base and repeat customers and new customers. And having better products means they can charge more for them and actually get more for them. If the Japanese and Germans can build quality cars and make money and sell them for retail, then the Americans can. If auto makers use crappy materials/engineering, then they are forced to sell for less money and with heavy rebates, so they then have less money for better materials/engineering, then they HAVE to use cheaper materials/engineering. Viscious cycle. Downward spiral. But I do think the domestics have improved somewhat.
-
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
(...)

Are you going to tell me that there are not bean counters in Europe and Asia?
There are.
The Asian and European automakers are not stuck paying pensions and health care for retirees like they are in the US. Nor do they have contracts that make it so that someoe who is laid off gets as much as someone who still works for the company.
Bean counters are important. Without bean counters, you wouldn't even know how much to sell a car for or how much those retirees need to get paid.
Jeff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Really? I guess the way a vehicle is maintained can make a difference. Before I sold my fleet service business we serviced thousands of Impala for small an large police departments. Most were run well over 200K or more before being take out of service. Corporate fleets kept their Impalas in service even longer, five years of more because of federal tax laws, but then again we serviced them maliciously.
mike hunt

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
My vehicle is serviced per the factory recommendations, which IMHO are woefully inadequate. It gets an oil change with dino squeezins every 7K miles, while the Porsche gets synthetic every 5K. However, that does not explain the racket from the A/C compressor, etc...
nate
Mike Hunter wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But of course, they're relatively new to automaking.
GM has had over 75 years of "practice". They've turned out millions of vehicles. You'd think it'd be a slam-dunk for them.
GM's problem is that every time they get close to getting all the bugs out of a model, they dump it, and re-invent the wheel all over.
Meanwhile, TOYOTA just keeps improving the Corolla and the Camray.... <rj>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You are correct the Doge Caravan is the best selling MINI Van but the Ford Econoline is the number one selling FULL size van, and that, my friend, is what the poster was referring to not minivans.
mike hunt

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 15 Jul 2006 19:29:27 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

years things go wrong with GM and Ford cars that should never go wrong ever. After you drop 20+ grand on a car you expect it to last more than a few years. Toyota and Honda kick GM and Ford ass for that reason. Nothing will change until US automakers develop a proven track record of quality. Bullshit and promises aren't going to work anymore.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.