Does GM have anything Stylish Coming Out?

I had a SAAB some years ago

They are very nice when they are brand new but they are a real pain when they get older and begin to need repairs

Betcha' they don't have the "Pontiac Glow" ;-) That makes all the difference in the world.

That's what I love about my Bonnie. I can actually sit in the engine bay while working on it. I did a spark plug and wire change in under 30 minutes. The previous version Bonnie's are even easier to work on. I did a plug and wire change in one of those a week ago, and it only took 15 minutes.

Even if they go bankrupt, that doesn't mean that they'll suddenly stop producing cars. They'll just restructure some debt and press on. Businesses sometimes go up and then down before going up again. It's the nature of a supply and demand, free market economy. If they continue losing market share, they'll just discontinue some models, scale down operations. Then when things pick up, they'll start producing more cars again.

If I ran GM, I'd diversify, like GE did, and go into some more profitable areas to bolster their bottom line. Also, I'd have a topdown new emphasis on customer service and standing behind their products. Like for instance, some of the manifold and gasket problems. They should turn those into voluntary recalls and fix the customer's cars before the engines overheat and become 500 pound paperweights. Because when someone's engine becomes toast due to a known design flaw, they aren't going to be buying another GM product and they will tell their relatives to avoid GM products. So not standing behind their products hurts their immediate and long term sales.

Didn't GM do the opposite some years ago? They used to make the Frigidaire appliances that were some of the best around.

The electronics in this Volvo were not so obvious, using only European icon-like figures to suggest the uses. There was no owners manual with it.

But, the same goes here for dishwashers, washing machines, driers, etc. With time, you can find out how they should work. ( One of the apartments had a drier with a Water icon. I had no idea, at first, what it meant. In those applications, there is no outside vent, and the water vapor from the clothing is condensed and stored in a water cannister. When 'Water' goes red, you have to dump the cannister.)

The transmission was really the only severely inconvenient part of the Volvo. I managed to drive it, but my wife would have freaked out. When she is in the country, I have to make sure I have a car she can drive, and this wasn't it.

Many, if not most, of the cars offer small diesel engines now. Some are turbocharged, and they offer great advantages in economy. Power isn't bad either. You have to do something when fuel costs darn near $8 per US gallon.

When fuel gets to $8 per gallon in the USA, I think the whole concept will be reevaluated.

You are so right they are already bankrupt but they keep on making cars

The banks will eventually pull the strings and stop the needless shedding of money

It is possible to fool most people most of the time

grappletech wrote:

wrote

So what you are saying is that they need to make a dumbed down version for you. If you can't handle a manual transmission, get something with an automatic.

Dave

That is not exactly what I said, but if that is the only way you can grasp it, then fair enough.

I have driven manual trannies all my life. This one was a piece of shit.

Better pencil necked than needle dicked, but I'd guess you'd be familiar with both situations. Plonk!

A dealer delivery is far from a several yr ownership.

Big deal. I consider that a medium length trip, but it is much better than a useless drive around the block.

What a generalization. There are so many different designs to meet different objectives.

I was a real foreign car driver back in the mid 50 - 60 ERA, when I couldn't even stand to look at the domestic chrome covered large gas eating cars. From the mid 60s to now I've been a domestic owner, Chrysler since '79 when they lead the move to FWD which I prefer for my driving. I had several Chrysler FWD vehicles from the 80s and was fairly pleased with them, particularly since Chrysler made significant design improvements with each new model. However Chrysler chose to make the RWD 300 monster to replace my LH car. That got me looking around and re evaluating what car I wanted. I've changed my car desires and since I had to do significant mid life maintenance on my LH I'll be sticking with it for several more yrs. So thx Chrysler for making a car I couldn't buy and getting me to put more thought to what I want. Toyota and a few other "so called imports" are a possibility.

In contrast to a lot of posters here, I also prefer FWD.

wrote in news:M5yMg.23980$kO3.6535 @newssvr12.news.prodigy.com:

If I didn't live in an area that gets a lot of snow and ice in the winter (when FWD is great), I'd prefer RWD. RWD cars are easier to fix and cheaper to fix also. Dropping a tranny in a RWD car is relatively quick and easy compared to taking one out from a FWD car.

Maybe...I can't really comment across the board. Each generation of cars has its easy and hard items, I guess.

On some FWD cars it is a piece of cake to removed the tranny. Others are harder but, as you say, most RWD cars are pretty easy.

That is an ambiguous statement, but that is a common misconception. While FWD by be better in unplowed snow, RWD handles more safely when the roads are merely covered with light snow and ice. The problem occurs when one decelerates and the engine braking is applied to the front wheels, rather than the rear wheels. That can easily cause the driver of a FWD vehicle to loose steering control, if he does not realize what is happening and shift into neutral or disengages the clutch. Even FWD vehicle that are available in AWD divert more of the torque to the rear wheels than the front when engaged. Some AWD/4WD vehicles supply as much as 80% of the power to the rear wheels, most are 60/40 or 70/30 but others go as low as 50 / 50

The Pa State police use primarily RWD Crown Vics year round, for that reason. Troopers are not to drive over the posted speed limit or use the few FWD unmarked cars in pursuit, after several troopers were injured or killed driving FWD cars at speed on wet and ice roads.

The is one of the reason FWD race cars now used in NASCAR, are convert to RWD.

mike hunt

The rest of what you had posted may be true (PA State Police claims), but this part isn't. The only reason that all NASCAR cars are rear wheel drive is because that is the spec for the car. The spec is 30 years old and has nothing to do with inherent ability or lack thereof in FWD design.

I've never had a problem with steering control loss with a FWD. I do lots of snow ice driving, going to our ski hill mountains. Of course I'm driving normally, not racing trying to catch someone. Even before ABS my FWD cars have continued straight ahead on deceleration, but that isn't so with all designs. A short wheel base compared to track is what causes control loss. Vehicles I've seen losing it under such conditions are the early Ford Bronco and Honda Civic.

Even the speed limit can be too much on slippery roads, regardless which end drives.

Racing is an completely different situation, not comparable to legal driving. Steering with the already slipping driving wheels will never win the race.

Picked up a book the other day with fact and fiction about American business.

The fiction was that the richest companies in the world are US oil and automobile companies.

Fact is, or was, that Toyota had over 17 billion dollars in cash reserves. They could buy GM.

In 1990, Ford was the wealthiest in the USA in terms of cash reserves. GM wasnt even close. Now look at Ford.

Anyone could buy GM

You > Picked up a book the other day with fact and fiction about American > business.