Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    General Motors Details Compensation Plan For Crossover Owners

    Sign in to follow this  

      Here is what GM will be offering owners of the crossovers with inflated fuel economy numbers

    Earlier this week, we reported that General Motors was working on a compensation plan for owners of 2016 Buick Enclave, Chevrolet Traverse, and GMC Acadia crossovers that had inflated fuel economy numbers. Yesterday, the company unveiled the plan.

     

    Automotive News and Reuters reports that GM will offer buyers the choice of either debit card (ranging from $450 to $1,500) or a 48 month/60,000 mile extended warranty. Those who are leasing the crossovers in question will only get the debit card. The amount a person will get will vary due to various factors including the difference between the inflated and actual fuel economy figures.

     

    “We want all of our customers to have a great ownership experience, so we designed this reimbursement program to provide full and fair compensation in a simple, flexible and timely manner,” said a GM spokesman in a statement.

     

    How much will this cost GM? A source tells Reuters that it will be about $100 million.

     

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required), Reuters

    Sign in to follow this  


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    100,000+ vehicles at $1,000 average, that is a $100 million mistake.  Whether they faked the label or just did it by accident costly either way.  

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If you're driving a Lambda and you own it.... take the extended warranty.

     

    While I do agree with you, what is the reason people should take the extended warranty if purchased instead of the debit card?

     

    I know from elsewhere that leased customers will only receive the debit card.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    If you're driving a Lambda and you own it.... take the extended warranty.

    While I do agree with you, what is the reason people should take the extended warranty if purchased instead of the debit card?

    I know from elsewhere that leased customers will only receive the debit card.

    They have some unresolved engine issues that can be very costly to repair. GM's response has been to shorten the oil change interval, but that doesn't really address the issue... It just pushes it out passed the warranty period.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Agree with Drew...would be wise to get the plan if you bought it...

     

    Most of these bad boys get leased anyways....not sure if I'd buy one used anyways. The 3.6 is very hard of oil, and most owners barely get the oil changed. That, and they suck gas....there are 2 of these monsters on side side of my family alone! They hold up well for those who care for them though...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Agree with Drew...would be wise to get the plan if you bought it...

     

    Most of these bad boys get leased anyways....not sure if I'd buy one used anyways. The 3.6 is very hard of oil, and most owners barely get the oil changed. That, and they suck gas....there are 2 of these monsters on side side of my family alone! They hold up well for those who care for them though...

    They do hold up well from those owners that actually take care of them.

    My partner's wife's 2006 GMC Acadia was bought the first year it came out, its still going on strong and she loves it to death.

     

    He...has bought recently a Tesla Model S, she....refuses to part with her GMC Acadia.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    100,000+ vehicles at $1,000 average, that is a $100 million mistake.  Whether they faked the label or just did it by accident costly either way.  

     Even if its a $100M issue... the penalty if they didn't act fast would be much higher. Nonetheless, the Lambdas are MINTS. Being around since 2007 pretty much unchanged, and still selling like hotcakes has its rewards. In truth.. I see zero reason why GM would abandon the platform. They simply should pull a "Toyota Corolla/Camy" and keep it going for another decade with a few updates to the inside. This is one platform where driving dynamics mean zero 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    100,000+ vehicles at $1,000 average, that is a $100 million mistake.  Whether they faked the label or just did it by accident costly either way.  

     Even if its a $100M issue... the penalty if they didn't act fast would be much higher. Nonetheless, the Lambdas are MINTS. Being around since 2007 pretty much unchanged, and still selling like hotcakes has its rewards. In truth.. I see zero reason why GM would abandon the platform. They simply should pull a "Toyota Corolla/Camy" and keep it going for another decade with a few updates to the inside. This is one platform where driving dynamics mean zero 

     

     

    The program to replace them is already well under way.  The big thing is weight.  I'm hoping that the weight loss the Acadia got translates well into the larger Traverse and Enclave once they are released.   One of the reasons they get such terrible mileage in the first place (even the overstated MPG stickers weren't great) is due to the fact they weigh so much and the 3.6 has to work hard all the time to moved these beasts around.  They could really do well with a smaller displacement V6 with a turbo tuned for torque rather than horsepower to get the low end grunt needed to move the mass.

     

    My experience with the Lambda fuel economy over the years seems to have been validated with this story though.... I've always struggled to get even close to the sticker rating on the highway and in the Suburban/Tahoe I have always beaten the Lambdas in that regard.

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    100,000+ vehicles at $1,000 average, that is a $100 million mistake.  Whether they faked the label or just did it by accident costly either way.  

     Even if its a $100M issue... the penalty if they didn't act fast would be much higher. Nonetheless, the Lambdas are MINTS. Being around since 2007 pretty much unchanged, and still selling like hotcakes has its rewards. In truth.. I see zero reason why GM would abandon the platform. They simply should pull a "Toyota Corolla/Camy" and keep it going for another decade with a few updates to the inside. This is one platform where driving dynamics mean zero 

     

     

    The program to replace them is already well under way.  The big thing is weight.  I'm hoping that the weight loss the Acadia got translates well into the larger Traverse and Enclave once they are released.   One of the reasons they get such terrible mileage in the first place (even the overstated MPG stickers weren't great) is due to the fact they weigh so much and the 3.6 has to work hard all the time to moved these beasts around.  They could really do well with a smaller displacement V6 with a turbo tuned for torque rather than horsepower to get the low end grunt needed to move the mass.

     

    My experience with the Lambda fuel economy over the years seems to have been validated with this story though.... I've always struggled to get even close to the sticker rating on the highway and in the Suburban/Tahoe I have always beaten the Lambdas in that regard.

     

     

     

    I kno. the weight. But in we all have to keep in mind that these vehicles were a safe measure for GM as possible replacements for GMT900s back in the day.. thus the size. I hope they retain that size too in the Buick and Chevy versions.. but after seeing the strides made in the K2xx and the new Acadia.. I am confident that the situation is covered pertaining to F/E

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Weight is the new HP War and GM has about the best handle on it now of any MFG. 

     

    They will lose the weight and employ the aluminum steel construction along with just good old engineering the weight out. GM really had done well with this part alone. 

     

    These models will do fine and only get better. 

    The $100M is not cheap but it could have been much worse financially and also been much worse PR wise. As it is this has gone under the radar of most media outlets and will be forgotten soon. In fact I suspect few owners ever complained as it was something never much of an issue on the web forums over other issues.  

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By Drew Dowdell
      The Society of Automotive Engineers has announced today that they are joining with Ford, General Motors, and Toyota to form the Automatic Vehicle Safety Consortium (AVSC), a group that will work together to test the deployment and development of Level 4 and Level 5 automated vehicles. 
      The AVSC will provide a safety framework for the advancement of the technology in a safe and responsible manner. The group will use the expertise of its current members to establish a set of guiding principles for safety. 
      GM, Ford, and Toyota already have autonomous vehicle development well underway.  GM is producing driverless Chevrolet Bolt EVs as part of a development and testing program via its GM Cruise unit. 

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      The Society of Automotive Engineers has announced today that they are joining with Ford, General Motors, and Toyota to form the Automatic Vehicle Safety Consortium (AVSC), a group that will work together to test the deployment and development of Level 4 and Level 5 automated vehicles. 
      The AVSC will provide a safety framework for the advancement of the technology in a safe and responsible manner. The group will use the expertise of its current members to establish a set of guiding principles for safety. 
      GM, Ford, and Toyota already have autonomous vehicle development well underway.  GM is producing driverless Chevrolet Bolt EVs as part of a development and testing program via its GM Cruise unit. 
    • By Drew Dowdell
      The First of GM’s All-New Pickups Posts a 20 Percent Q1 Gain
      Industry retail sales, consumer sentiment rebounding GM average transaction prices set new first-quarter company record Chevrolet Trax, Equinox and Colorado set first-quarter company sales records DETROIT — General Motors (NYSE: GM) announced today that it delivered 665,840 vehicles in the first quarter of 2019, with a selling mix of trucks, SUVs and crossovers above 80 percent. GM’s focus on these vibrant segments helped it earn the highest average transaction prices for any first quarter in the company’s history.
      The Chevrolet Trax, Equinox and Colorado all set GM first-quarter sales records and the GMC Acadia posted its best quarter ever. The all-new Cadillac XT4 was the best-selling vehicle in its segment and the Buick Enclave was up 28 percent versus a year ago.
      The all-new full-size pickups from Chevrolet and GMC are also off to a very strong start.
      “Our production launch was very smooth and crew cab sales are brisk, especially those with premium trims,” said Kurt McNeil, U.S. vice president, Sales Operations. “We look forward to improving availability of our wide-range of cabs, trim series and powertrains.”
      First-quarter 2019 average transaction prices for GM's all-new, light-duty pickups were $8,040 higher compared to their outgoing models in the first quarter of 2018, with the GMC Sierra leading the segment, according to J.D. Power PIN estimates. Combined sales of the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 crew cabs — the first of the company’s all-new full-size pickups to launch — were up 20 percent year over year. Crew-cab production mix is currently running above 70 percent to meet strong customer demand, up 10 percentage points on average from the previous-generation trucks. More than 95 percent of the all-new GMC Sierra 1500 crew cab sales are high-end trims including SLT, AT4 and Denali. Availability of all-new regular-cab and double-cab pickups was very limited during the quarter due to launch timing, but full production of all cab styles started in March and they currently are arriving in dealer showrooms.
      GM will begin the next phase of its full-size pickup truck launch in the second half of the year with the all-new 2020 Chevrolet Silverado HD and GMC Sierra HD.
      “We are bullish on pickups and expect to gain sales momentum throughout the year,” said McNeil. “We are installing capacity in Flint to build more HD pickups in total, more crew cab models, more dualies and diesel models, too, all in response to dealer and customer demand.”
      Other new models launching this year include the XT6, Cadillac’s first three-row crossover, and the CT5, Cadillac’s new luxury-sport sedan. The all-new Chevrolet Blazer is also gaining momentum, and the brand will begin national advertising for the vehicle during the second quarter as production ramps up.
      Solid U.S. Economy, Strong GM Operating Discipline
      GM sales in the first quarter of 2019 were down 7 percent year over year compared to a very strong first quarter of 2018.
      “After a slow start to the year, the retail SAAR has risen each month since January,” said Elaine Buckberg, GM chief economist. “Consumer sentiment continued to recover in March and the other key drivers of auto sales like employment, wage growth and household balance sheets are healthy. The Fed paused in raising interest rates, which eases a headwind facing auto sales. Overall, the U.S. economy is in solid shape, which bodes well for the industry outlook.”
      GM’s Commercial deliveries, which are another barometer of economic strength, grew at an average annual rate of more than 7 percent from 2012 to 2017 and were up 11 percent year over year in 2018. Commercial deliveries were close to flat to a very strong first quarter a year ago, even with limited availability of regular light- and heavy-duty pickups, and heavy-duty crew-cab pickups.
      GM has demonstrated continued strong operating discipline and is very well positioned heading into the second quarter:
      The company’s incentive spending as a percentage of average transaction price was 13 percent, down close to a full percentage point year over year, according to J.D Power PIN. GM’s per-unit incentive spending was down $175 year over year, as domestic competitors increased their spending in the quarter, according to J.D. Power PIN. Average transaction prices rose $938 to a first-quarter record of $35,881, according to J.D. Power PIN. Inventory is a healthy 818,967 units heading into the second quarter, which tends to be a strong quarter for industry sales.   QUARTER 1 (CALENDAR YEAR-TO-DATE) JANUARY - MARCH   2019 2018 %Change Volume   2019 2018 %Change Volume   Cascada 746 918 -18.7   746 918 -18.7   Enclave 12,580 9,869 27.5   12,580 9,869 27.5   Encore 24,606 25,468 -3.4   24,606 25,468 -3.4   Envision 7,623 9,696 -21.4   7,623 9,696 -21.4   LaCrosse 2,902 7,066 -58.9   2,902 7,066 -58.9   Regal 3,408 3,708 -8.1   3,408 3,708 -8.1   Buick Total 51,867 56,804 -8.7   51,867 56,804 -8.7   ATS 522 3,962 -86.8   522 3,962 -86.8   CT6 2,188 2,467 -11.3   2,188 2,467 -11.3   CTS 2,428 2,442 -0.6   2,428 2,442 -0.6   Escalade 6,819 8,111 -15.9   6,819 8,111 -15.9   XT4 7,026 0 ***.*   7,026 0 ***.*   XT5 13,278 14,845 -10.6   13,278 14,845 -10.6   XTS 3,734 4,898 -23.8   3,734 4,898 -23.8   Cadillac Total 35,995 36,727 -2.0   35,995 36,727 -2.0   Blazer 3,023 0 ***.*   3,023 0 ***.*   Bolt EV 4,316 4,375 -1.3   4,316 4,375 -1.3   Camaro 12,083 11,792 2.5   12,083 11,792 2.5   Colorado 33,494 28,859 16.1   33,494 28,859 16.1   Corvette 3,943 4,457 -11.5   3,943 4,457 -11.5   Cruze 23,311 39,855 -41.5   23,311 39,855 -41.5   Equinox 88,500 82,398 7.4   88,500 82,398 7.4   Express 17,215 19,774 -12.9   17,215 19,774 -12.9   Impala 13,259 14,067 -5.7   13,259 14,067 -5.7   LCF 559 530 5.5   559 530 5.5   Malibu 34,197 34,150 0.1   34,197 34,150 0.1   Silverado 114,313 135,545 -15.7   114,313 135,545 -15.7   Sonic 4,460 5,983 -25.5   4,460 5,983 -25.5   Spark 6,423 6,945 -7.5   6,423 6,945 -7.5   Suburban 11,029 14,725 -25.1   11,029 14,725 -25.1   Tahoe 20,853 23,643 -11.8   20,853 23,643 -11.8   Traverse 34,223 38,198 -10.4   34,223 38,198 -10.4   Trax 24,580 20,482 20.0   24,580 20,482 20.0   Volt 2,520 3,478 -27.5   2,520 3,478 -27.5   Chevrolet Total 452,401 490,919 -7.8   452,401 490,919 -7.8   Acadia 31,200 29,900 4.3   31,200 29,900 4.3   Canyon 6,954 7,213 -3.6   6,954 7,213 -3.6   Savana 6,566 4,797 36.9   6,566 4,797 36.9   Sierra 40,546 41,468 -2.2   40,546 41,468 -2.2   Terrain 25,364 32,964 -23.1   25,364 32,964 -23.1   Yukon 14,947 15,002 -0.4   14,947 15,002 -0.4   GMC Total 125,577 131,344 -4.4   125,577 131,344 -4.4   GM Vehicle Total* 665,840 715,794 -7.0   665,840 715,794 -7.0                     76 selling days for the QUARTER 1 this year and 77 for same QUARTER last year.  
    • By dwightlooi
      Since the launch of the XT4 with the rather anemic (if more refined) LSY engine, many (including myself) had questioned why GM does not offer the Tripower 310 bhp / 348 lb-ft (L3B) 2.7T 4-cylinder in the XT4 (at least) as an option. To a lesser extent some have also questioned why the LSY is putting out a mere 237bhp / 258 lb-ft whereas the outgoing LTG engine is good for 265~272 bhp / 295 lb-ft. Is it just so that it can have 258 lb-ft arrive @ 1,500 rpm? Now, we have the answer...
      It's the 9-speed Automatics.
      Adopting the 9-speed automatics is deemed a priority for refinement and fuel economy. The new GM-Ford 9TXX transmissions, jointly developed with Ford promises better fuel economy and better shift quality. There are currently two versions of this transmission:-
      9T50   -- 258 lb-ft 9T65   -- 280 lb-ft The need to pack 9-speeds into a very slim transmission case meant that they have to use an ovoid cross section torque converter, a tension chain coupling and abandon the high torque capability of the previous generation top dog 6T80 (369 lb-ft) transmissions used in the 410 hp / 368 lb-ft 3.6L Twin-Turbo (LF3) powered Cadillac XTS. The lack of torque capability is also in part why Ford abandoned the use of the GM-Ford 9TXX transmissions, choosing instead to develop an 8-speed evolution of the decade old 6T80 for use in their high torque applications like the Ford Edge ST (2.7L Ecoboost V6 with 335 hp / 380 lb-ft). Ford also asserts that the new 9-speed autos did not yield any fuel economy improvement when tested with their engines and the refinement improvements alone did not justify the costs and weight increases.

      View full article
    • By dwightlooi
      Since the launch of the XT4 with the rather anemic (if more refined) LSY engine, many (including myself) had questioned why GM does not offer the Tripower 310 bhp / 348 lb-ft (L3B) 2.7T 4-cylinder in the XT4 (at least) as an option. To a lesser extent some have also questioned why the LSY is putting out a mere 237bhp / 258 lb-ft whereas the outgoing LTG engine is good for 265~272 bhp / 295 lb-ft. Is it just so that it can have 258 lb-ft arrive @ 1,500 rpm? Now, we have the answer...
      It's the 9-speed Automatics.
      Adopting the 9-speed automatics is deemed a priority for refinement and fuel economy. The new GM-Ford 9TXX transmissions, jointly developed with Ford promises better fuel economy and better shift quality. There are currently two versions of this transmission:-
      9T50   -- 258 lb-ft 9T65   -- 280 lb-ft The need to pack 9-speeds into a very slim transmission case meant that they have to use an ovoid cross section torque converter, a tension chain coupling and abandon the high torque capability of the previous generation top dog 6T80 (369 lb-ft) transmissions used in the 410 hp / 368 lb-ft 3.6L Twin-Turbo (LF3) powered Cadillac XTS. The lack of torque capability is also in part why Ford abandoned the use of the GM-Ford 9TXX transmissions, choosing instead to develop an 8-speed evolution of the decade old 6T80 for use in their high torque applications like the Ford Edge ST (2.7L Ecoboost V6 with 335 hp / 380 lb-ft). Ford also asserts that the new 9-speed autos did not yield any fuel economy improvement when tested with their engines and the refinement improvements alone did not justify the costs and weight increases.
  • Social Stream

  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...