Ouch, things just get worse for General Motors. It doesn't seem like any of these particular jobs will be from Holden who is largely the most successful GM brand (and has been for quite a while).
VQ
11-21-2005, 04:38 PM
Holden already has fired a heap of people, it's so frustrating, they need to kick everyone out at top level and bring new people in who actually know what to do.
chris
11-21-2005, 04:46 PM
But once again, the problems will be blamed on those pesky Japanese car makers, without I suppose addressing the real problems at GM.
VQ
11-21-2005, 06:39 PM
Well technically it is their fault, if they didn't come in and become more efficient then GM would survive, however, GM has tried to get better, they just have a different way of doing things, same with Ford.
Frank N. O.
11-21-2005, 07:34 PM
Actually I heard the crisis is so big that some japanese carmakers have put forward ideas to limit their production since the collaps of the US-giants would have devastating effect, but then another japanese company said they would do no such thing, can't remember who said what but one of them was Toyota I think.
I also heard GM has cancelled a contract with a independant company that used to design the interiors for theirs cars and that company again had subcontractors now loosing business, it's a rolling snowball.
I heard a CNN news-segment earlier today on the topic, with the guy from Car and Driver who said GM should start making cars people actually want to buy, and I have to agree with that but also extend it to BMW and co. Their ultra equipment-packed and lead-heavy grotesque-looking things are overboard. Packing a car with tons of equipment, sound-proofing, electric everything, on-board entertainments system etc. are now at a point where a driver is in the dark from what is actually going on with the car and the road which is not good for safety and the production and R&D cost for these things has to be extreme but I fear it's too late for change. The companies are way to big for radical changes, even if they are crucial for survival.
Frank
jtace
11-21-2005, 09:04 PM
Really sucks that they have to do this, but I'd rather GM do this then go bankrupt in a year and have no jobs for anyone. GM does need to revamp things, they didn't jump off the SUV ship fast enough.. heh..
chris
11-21-2005, 09:37 PM
Indeed, they actually said that SUV's would be the saviour of the company. :rolleyes: It was the over reliance on SUV's that got it in such a terrible predicament.
VQ
11-22-2005, 01:06 AM
Yes, lots hope that they use the Zeta platform properly....
And with GM going downhill America will go down the drain a lot.
However Frank I sort of dissagree with you on the gadgets thing, they do it to justify the huge cost, otherwise we'd all be driving Ford Ka's....
jtace
11-22-2005, 05:38 AM
GM going down hilll will effect the car market, but I don't see how it will have a major impact on the rest of america. heh.
Nappe1
11-22-2005, 05:39 AM
GM is at least partially facing same problems as BMC Leyland had in late 70's: R&D didn't go forward and tightening competition put older way designed cars to be sold without any profit.
Right now it looks like that gettign rid of "force buying" part of Fiat deal was absolutely needed. Getting all the depth that Fiat Automobili has, would have made the company living dead.
I have heard that Oldsmobile as make was killed already. I wonder how it's gonna take before management notices that they should sell the makes instead of killing them.
At least they sold their ownership from Subaru. Toyota got 9% of that stake. if we speculate more further, Subaru and Saab share quite lot in nowdays models and what Toyota is missing is believable luxury brand for europe. Lexus sells nice in U.S., but in europe, it hasn't been able to challenge BMW, Audi and Mercedes. It might could maybe be that Toyota is looking for good parts to buy from GM whenever they come available. This is also supported the fact that GM and Toyota has cross ownership deal and coproduction models in production. If I recal right TMC owns something like 10-20% of GMC while owns about 5-10% of TMC.
This is going to be interesting to see, what eventually happens.
EDIT: as an addition, in worst case, I doubt that we see vanish of U.S. makes, but more like I see them sold to other owners. if those owners come from U.S. or outside, remains to be seen. If GM gets into even worse situation, they most likely put some of the brands on sale, to get other brands on better situation with incoming fund from sold brands. Still, I think that we'll see before that all overseas brands to be sold, before they start even think about U.S. brands, so that situation is still quite far off.
Frank N. O.
11-22-2005, 08:48 AM
Doesn't it cost a lot to develop and produce a car with tons of electronic equipment? And I didn't mean electric windows or mirros or c-locking but stuff like 10 motors to automatically adjust seats, massage, cooling and heating and wide-screen tv's in the headrest that's over the top imho. And giant stereo-systems in cars that are already so sound-proof you can't hear a wolf-horn until it's right next to you (very noticeable emergency-vehicle siren).
The 206 I drive has electrically heated mirrors, electric front side windows and remote central locking (doors only, not windows) and I'd appreciate electrically adjustable mirrors too for reversing etc. and the locks to close open side-windows too but some of the stuff I've seen on cars like Opels and such are wild, even a MB S-class didn't have that 15 years ago. Btw speaking of mirrors and design, the 206 may look cool with the sloping roof and the triangle 205-like C-pillars, but the visibility out the rear is awfull with the rear-view mirror (can't see the windshield on a normal car (not SUV/van) just 50 meters behind me on a level road) and the side-mirros don't help much to help the c-pillar problem when reversing out of a parking-lot with cars on your side, in that case you need to see over your shoulder.
Anyway back on topic, just because it hasn't happend before doesn't mean one shouldn't take precausions imho. Being overconfident has never helped anyone in history and there is a lot of people's fate at stake here, but of course I wish them all the best.
The idea about selling the brands off instead of killing them could perhaps work if there were good people reviving the spirit of what the brand originally was so customers would buy the cars, unlike what people has done to other brands like MG for instance. But the factories and people might also be working to make a new brand but with the existing technology and people so quality wouldn't be a problem, but I think one would need a very good leader or group to actually make it happend, but one can always hope for the best while preparing for the less good.
Frank
chris
11-22-2005, 12:26 PM
Lexus builds high quality cars, but usually they have too many electronic nannies prohibiting the car from being driven in a particularly spirited fashion.
The LS series is pretty much the best Lexus of the lot. Always a bit of an odd-ball thing, archly conservative at first appearances, but with a hidden ability to go surprisingly quickly. Prompted with the throttle, an LS backshifts faster than a politician's promise.
That's probably the best quality of a LS400 or LS430, the superb engine and transmission.
GM needs to take a page out of Ford Australia's book. Ford Australia was at one stage crippled, nearly dead. But it put up the fight of its life to come right back vibrant health today. And it builds today some of the best cars in the Ford empire, certainly some of the most high-tech.
GM's problem in North America was that went it should have dumped oversized SUV's and admitted its troubles, it said something to the equivalent of, "oh we've got the new series of SUV's coming along and they are going to be great". Oops.
What does it need? Well, perhaps a small compact sedan for the masses to take on the likes of Honda Accord, Subaru Legacy, etc. Holden could provide it, with the Torana concept car revealed a while back. Obviously ditch the crazed 400hp twin-turbo V6 engine, install into it a little 3.2L V6, or maybe a 2.8L V6, or even a 2.2L 4 cylinder and bingo, you'll have the ideal weapon for attacking the Japanese manufacturers in the market place, especially since it is rear-wheel-drive, not front-drive. You attack them with the one feature they don't have, and can not readily add to their cars without a major redesign. And when marketing the car, you really market it heavily on the fact it is rear-wheel-drive and not front-wheel-drive. Show that it has inherent advantages that the Japanese rivals have no possibility of matching.
Holden knows how to make a fun to drive car, and this particular one screams "upmarket". Ideal replacement for some snooze-mobiles.
It's fairly high-tech with modern design ideas, and could be translated to the Chevrolet brand without much difficulty. Even Opel and Vauxhall brands could market it with little trouble.
And with the possibility of the twin-turbo V6 version, you've even got a possible Lancer Evo IX / Impreza WRX rival. Best of all, the design work is all done, just needs to be put in production. When you've got surely winning designs sitting around ready to be used, why not sell them and have a chance to make some money off them.
Smokey!
11-22-2005, 01:36 PM
Actually I heard the crisis is so big that some japanese carmakers have put forward ideas to limit their production since the collaps of the US-giants would have devastating effect, but then another japanese company said they would do no such thing, can't remember who said what but one of them was Toyota I think.
Dosnt GM own 30% of Toyota? I keep wondering how firing the people who makes your products will make the production better? Strange tactic but seemingly used widely nowadays. If the company is doing bad, isnt it the people who is responsible who is responsible? The ones that makes decisions and sit in the big chair? The problem these days seems to be that these people simply refuse to be responsible for their actions.
IŽd say we remove these people from their thrones before the kingdom itself is destroyed.
Myshkin
11-22-2005, 03:03 PM
It does not surprise me that GM is having troubles. I have to drive GM vehicles because I rent a lot of cars, and I hate every one. In fact, if they give me a Malibu I request ANY other car. I take Hyundais and Kias over the POS Malibu (those Koreans certainly have made big strides in the last decade). Pontiac? Ugh. I am indifferent towards the Ford Taurus, but I don't hate it. Best cars I have rented were the Nissan Altima, Mazda 6 and last week they gave me a Nissan Murano up in Michigan. I got a Mazda Miata once, that was kind of fun.
Only cars from GM that I would like to drive are the Corvette and maybe one of the sporty Cadillacs, the latter more from curiosity. So I agree with anyone that says that for GM to survive they have to make a decent car.
We were thinking of buying a new economy car next year so that we can drive down to my wife's hometown more often, but GM and Ford are not really options at this point. There are a bunch of little economy cars coming to the US from every car maker in the next year, and I am pretty certain we won't be getting a US brand.
Commander
11-22-2005, 03:21 PM
I am a GM loyalist, but I have to agree that there really isn't a car GM makes that I love ,aside from the Corvette. Since all the GM cars look Japanese, then one might as well save some cash and just get a car that IS Japanese. GM needs to make something that appeals to people, doesn't cost an arm and a leg, and isn't a pig on fuel consumption. I nearly crapped myself when I heard that Pontiac released yet another bloody SUV this year, what I burn! :nono:
VQ
11-22-2005, 03:24 PM
The Torana car is a lot further off then we think it is Chris. Also it would be more of a M3 competitor then EVO rival in the class level, at least thats how the previous CEO was intending it to be, but the current one just makes bad desicions left right and center, 50% of the VE will only be Australian made for gods sakes! Blaming the market and fuel costs and slower sales and all, but apparntly GM has picked up the Zeta platform again and with any luck in 07 there will be new RWD cars from GM....
Also, Holden in the 80's was near dead too, they had to split up the engine company and the ca production into two seperate parts and they got a huge injection of funds from America and closed off all but two of their plants and once the VN was into it's second year of relese Holden was back on top again and has been ever since basically, so GM internally has dealt with this before.
The problem with selling everything off is tat the ones that made huge money (like GM EMD) and got them through at times have been sold off, apparantly GM EMD got them through in the 80's as well, but they only have cash from the sale now, no constant profit, not planning far enough ahead....
chris
11-22-2005, 05:26 PM
The VE Commodore itself is a must succeed thing as well. Seeing the VE, the first thing that strikes you is how similar it is to that Torana concept car, but bigger. You wonder if it might just end up with an Opel badge on it, it'd easily be able to wear an Opel badge.
Hope the VE Commodore will be good. You'd think it would, based on the $1,000,000,000 development budget. (yes, that's right, a billion dollars!) :yikes:
But given that it will ultimately be the base of other cars in the GM empire it makes sense to spend a lot of money and get it done right, first time. It can't afford to fail. GM can't afford for the VE to fail - they need it to be very, very good.
This is a test-mule for the new V8 Zeta platform VE Commodore. It's a current model, but definately not with the current mechanicals. Note the exhausts exiting at the back. Looking a bit M5-ish..
Wonder how much power it has.
Justin Martin
11-22-2005, 09:15 PM
Like Mysh, i've never driven a GM car that didn't annoy me to no end. Their recent fullsize trucks do drive fairly nice, though as always the interior quality needs alot of work. And I do like old GM's. But with the obvious exceptions, I wouldn't touch any GM car made in the last 30 years with a ten foot pole.
Kinda reminds me of a John Phillips quote from several years ago - back when Bob Lutz first joined GM. He said that what Lutz needed to do to fix Chevrolet was quit building every Chevy model except the trucks and the Corvette. Why? Because given how good the trucks and Corvettes are, and how crappy everything else is, it's obvious that all their engineers want to design are trucks and Corvettes.
It was meant as satire, of course, but it almost seems true...
Commander
11-22-2005, 11:54 PM
I would say that GM made some very nice cars within the last 30 years, but I get your point. The 2000 + Grand Ams, all F-bodies, the GXP/GTP, the Caddies etc are all great cars, but man, we are talking serious cash here, and not something the average Joe can go out and purchase sensibly. The affordable GM cars of late are still overpriced when compared to their import counterparts, and are really nothing to write home about either. I friend of mine just got a new Pursuit, and was all happy to show it off. I didn't want to break the guy's heart, but the thing is about as exciting as a Hyundai Stellar, perhaps even less so. The GM trucks are awesome, but really, 99% of people who buy them do so as status symbols, and never really use the vehicle for what the truck was intended for. The brutish GM trucks are best suited for oil or construction crews and the like where hauling and rough terrain is common. SUV's? Bah, what a joke! I hate SUV's like nothing else in the world. These gas pigs are ugly, impractical, and imho, dangerous when put into the hands of a bad driver. With GM's focus on SUV's and their paltry efforts to bring about a decent fleet of econo cars, I could smell the troubles years ago. Oh yeah, anyone remember the Camaro / Firebird? Killing those off was another boneheaded move right there. I dunno, the solution seems so blatently obvious to everyone I talk to, but for some reason the big shots at GM just can't seem to see the forest for the trees.
VQ
11-23-2005, 12:15 AM
The pumped gaurds look good, but the HSV's now have an LS2, the pumped gaurds are V8 Supercar style really. Well the billion dollars is to fresh develop the car from the ground up, the AU had a billion dollars behind it, the BA had 500 million but the Territory's budget was the same amount and both cars are similar in a lot of ways, but we also must remember that the Zeta platform was designed to be a universal platform for GM, sorta funny if it does go over as an Opel, because the previous three first Commodores (VB, VN, VT) were all based on Opels afterall...
Did you read the thing in Wheels about what the VE could look like and about the exausts? The HSV's have quads as well.
Nappe1
11-23-2005, 08:39 AM
It does not surprise me that GM is having troubles. I have to drive GM vehicles because I rent a lot of cars, and I hate every one. In fact, if they give me a Malibu I request ANY other car. I take Hyundais and Kias over the POS Malibu (those Koreans certainly have made big strides in the last decade). Pontiac? Ugh. I am indifferent towards the Ford Taurus, but I don't hate it. Best cars I have rented were the Nissan Altima, Mazda 6 and last week they gave me a Nissan Murano up in Michigan. I got a Mazda Miata once, that was kind of fun.
Only cars from GM that I would like to drive are the Corvette and maybe one of the sporty Cadillacs, the latter more from curiosity. So I agree with anyone that says that for GM to survive they have to make a decent car.
We were thinking of buying a new economy car next year so that we can drive down to my wife's hometown more often, but GM and Ford are not really options at this point. There are a bunch of little economy cars coming to the US from every car maker in the next year, and I am pretty certain we won't be getting a US brand.
funniest thing is, GM has been _THE ONE_ maker showing us hybrids and fuel cell prototypes since mid-80's but still I think GM most likely will be the last one to get it working right in production cars. It's like they would be living in late 50's "Now in Color" commericial ad film, where 21st century ppl are living in motoring utopia. It's like only need to do is, show that you can do it, if you want... no need to make money out of it.
Ford already gave up and bought cheap *ss license for TMC Hybrid technology, but I doubt GM doing same, eventhough they have much closer relationship to TMC than Ford. They have just wasted too much money to admit that Toyota did it better and bring it to the consumer market faster PLUS, made it lisenceable _very cheap_
Chris, have you heard about upcoming LS460 with Hybrid Tech? :) In Tokyo Auto Show they claimed 5 sec acceleration from 0-100kph for the car that weights close to same as MB S 500. :eek: (There's lot's of potential in torque side in electrical engines. In same article I read that Toyota had demonstrated LF-A performance to the press at Fuji Speedway. The Sound of V10 in it was said to be "as memorial as Miura had back in '67 when heard first time.")
VQ
11-23-2005, 10:24 PM
GM's Locomotive arm has been doing Hyrbids since Diesel elctric trains have first come out, so it's not like they haven't been doing it, just on a much much larger scale, they have done a Diesel Electric Astra which is a regular Astra coupe with the transmission replaced for two electric motors IIIRC, but Americans don't want diesels so it is for the Europeon market.
Commander
11-24-2005, 12:40 AM
GM was wrong to fold the locomotive division. CP alone added something like 12 new locos this year, and at the price of an EMD these days, that is some serious coin.
chris
11-24-2005, 02:40 AM
The pumped gaurds look good, but the HSV's now have an LS2, the pumped gaurds are V8 Supercar style really. Well the billion dollars is to fresh develop the car from the ground up, the AU had a billion dollars behind it, the BA had 500 million but the Territory's budget was the same amount and both cars are similar in a lot of ways, but we also must remember that the Zeta platform was designed to be a universal platform for GM, sorta funny if it does go over as an Opel, because the previous three first Commodores (VB, VN, VT) were all based on Opels afterall...
Did you read the thing in Wheels about what the VE could look like and about the exausts? The HSV's have quads as well.
I did read the article, picked up Wheels mag today. Key points:
- styling derived largely from Torana concept car
- longer wheelbase, but same overall length as VT to VZ series (more interior room?)
- Better fuel economy (V8, cylinder de-activation, variable valve-timing)
- 6L80 6 speed automatic transmission
- 2.8L V6 base model - Europe market perhaps?
- Gasoline-electric hybrid version too??
- Turbocharged Diesel 3.0L V6 - 162kW/500Nm?? - Again aimed at Europe too??
- Re-organising Zeta platform: Does that mean selling Commodore as it is on overseas markets it currently doesn't frequent?
- Designed from the ground up as a Commodore, $1 billion development budget.
- New suspension geometry, no carry over from previous models - wider track widths??
Looking at the prototypes spy photos from the GM proving ground in America, this looks like one handsome, well proportioned car. It has shorter overhangs than normal as well and looks much better for it.
This is my guess at a model range:
V6 gasoline engines:
Base: 2.8L V6 - 6 speed automatic or 6 speed manual
Mid range: 3.6L V6, 6 speed auto or manual
Top range: 3.6L V6, twin-turbocharged.
V6 Diesel:
3.0L V6 turbo-diesel
V8:
6.0L V8 with displacement on demand, 6 speed automatic or 6 speed manual
I'm wondering about a 7.0L V8 version for range-topping higher performance models, but think with high fuel prices it'd be highly doubtful now.
VQ
11-24-2005, 09:46 PM
Well the LS7 isn't that a wasteful engine and for 100k from a HSV, people would be able to afford the fuel cost.
I don't think there will be a 2.8 sold in Australia however, it makes no sense, it would make the car way to slow. but a TTV6 is just what we need as well as the Italian diesel (looked up their site, I think it's VM something, they have a lovely twin turbo DOHC V6 TDi motor as you've mentioned, up the boost or tune it and it will make even more power!) But I think the engine is for Australia, if they market it righ it would be a lot better then a petrol electric hybrid, that's for sure.
chris
11-24-2005, 10:35 PM
I do agree about a twin-turbo V6. Yesterday I was near a new Ford XR6 Turbo, one of the brand new ones. It was idling away in such a smooth and refined manner. Sounded great. :) A lot like one of the larger BMW inline-6 engines to be honest.
And also looking at the Falcons with the 6 speed automatic transmissions, the 4L inline-6 turbo versions are always faster than equivalent V8 models.
The quickest of the Turbocharged Falcons on offer at the moment is hardly any slower than the old 5L V8 BMW M5, yet it goes about its business with none of the BMW's raucous nature. Just plant the foot on throttle for express acceleration and little fuss.
VQ
11-25-2005, 09:06 AM
Yes, that's because the 5.4 is a slower revving V8 and is a heck of a lot heavier just in the engine (in boss form it's about 250kg's, that's heavier then a Clevland 351 used in the GTHO's.
As quick as the XR6T and Typhoon are, the LS2 powered HSV's are rockets, which are just improving all the time, next model they will have a good tranny too....
I bought the magazine today as well, and the Commodore does look good and yet similar, which is good for the Ute and wagon which won't be updated for a while sadly, but unlike the VS ute, at least the VZIII ute will have the same front end and with any luck dash so that people with VT's and fit them straight in....
i hope that VM diesel motor does go in too. And GM EMD did bring GM through in the past, they are stupid for selling it, a loco even though a few are sold, would cost 8 digits at least depending on motor and timespan for it to be built, just bloody stupid GM trying to get cash quick.