• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    GM Considers Outsourcing Some Production Of Commercial Vans To Boost Midsize Truck Production


    • GM Is Trying To Squeeze Out More Midsize Trucks, So Some Commerical Van Production May Move Elsewhere

    General Motors' midsize trucks has become a bright spot for the company. Originally forecasted to sell around 80,000 this year, the company is now on track to selling near 120,000 Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon trucks by the end of year. The two model are also the fastest-selling vehicles this year with the average time a Colorado sat on a dealer lot landing around 27 days. The Canyon was slightly longer with a 37 day average.

     

    But this has caused a supply problem for GM. The Wentzville, Missouri plant where both trucks are built has been pushed to the limits. Currently, the plant has three shifts and also builds models during the weekend. Even workers at the plant have agreed to plan to adjust break times to eliminate a six-minute lull between shifts.

     

    This appears to be not enough and GM is now looking into other measures. Automotive News has learned that GM is looking into outsourcing production of cutaway models of Chevrolet Express and GMC Savana, the other models built at Wentzville, to AM General. This was revealed to workers by a note sent out by GM earlier in the week.

     

    “The truck and van continue strong sales. This potential partnership would free up production capacity and allow the organization to capitalize on our ability to build midsize trucks to further satisfy customer demand,” said the note.

     

    According to a source, cutaway vans account for one-third of total production at Wentzville.

     

    AM General, the folks who brought you the Hummer, has been in the process of expanding its contract manufacturing business. Back in August, the company announced a deal with Mercedes-Benz to build the R-Class crossover that would then be sent over to China.

     

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

    0


    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback


    Smart Move by GM, I expect this to continue strong well through the end of next year now that they have the diesel also.

     

    Like Drew, I wonder how fast they can spin up production at the contractor for the van work.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Presumably AM General is at least familiar with GM processes. And if they're working as hired guns they can probably get up and running pretty quickly.

    What a wonderful problem for GM to have in the truck segment.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I wonder how long the Savana and Express will last anyway.  They are like 20 year old designs and the Euro-style vans are taking over.  The Promaster is a bad vehicle luckily.  But I wonder if GM could allocate that whole factory to pick ups, and build a new van off a new platform some place else.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I wonder how long the Savana and Express will last anyway.  They are like 20 year old designs and the Euro-style vans are taking over.  The Promaster is a bad vehicle luckily.  But I wonder if GM could allocate that whole factory to pick ups, and build a new van off a new platform some place else.

    I do wonder if they plan to replace those oldies w/ a modern style van anytime soon.  

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I believe the problem is, GM's fullsize van in Europe is a joint venture, they don't have their own design like FCA (horrible FWD POS) or Ford (Transit, much nicer) so they may not have the authority to commit to the fullsize van market here with their European fullsize vans.  I hope they don't hand the market over completely to Ford here in the U.S.

     

    On the other hand, Ford is caught with their pants down here in the U.S. in midsize trucks.  When they dropped the Ranger, they had the audacity to state that the FIESTA would take over as the vehicle of choice for Ranger customers... they held the completely erroneous notion that Ranger customers were more interested in a CHEAP VEHICLE than an actual small pickup truck... everyone can see how that panned out.  Fiesta sales aren't exactly taking up the slack... and I don't see any aftermarket Fiesta Ranchero conversions yet.  ;)

     

    Another point:  how will Ford market their Aussie Ranger here with a tried-and-true steel body, next to their aluminum F-series?  They would sound like hypocrites.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yeah, the large Opel/Vauxhall Movano is a JV w/ Renault (it's based on the Renault Master), and the midsize Vivano is based on the Renault Trafic.

    Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yeah, the large Opel/Vauxhall Movano is a JV w/ Renault (it's based on the Renault Master), and the midsize Vivano is based on the Renault Trafic.

    Hmmm... and Renault is in bed with Datsun, and Chevy sells the Datsun NV200 here in the U.S. as the City Express...  :huh:

     

    Which, BTW, I have seen like ZERO City Express vans around here on the road, and only very few NV200s... the Transit Connect RULES the tiny van market.  We won't mention the ProMaster City...

    Edited by ocnblu
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Yeah, the large Opel/Vauxhall Movano is a JV w/ Renault (it's based on the Renault Master), and the midsize Vivano is based on the Renault Trafic.

    Hmmm... and Renault is in bed with Datsun, and Chevy sells the Datsun NV200 here in the U.S. as the City Express...  :huh:

     

    Which, BTW, I have seen like ZERO City Express vans around here on the road, and only very few NV200s... the Transit Connect RULES the tiny van market.  We won't mention the ProMaster City...

     

    I have yet to see a City Express or a Pro Master City in the Phoenix area.  The only NV200s I've seen are on the front row of the Nissan dealer.  Maybe GM could do a JV to get a variation of the NV1500-3500 and put GM engines and Chevy/GMC noses on them.. 

     

    Note that Nissan hasn't used the Datsun name in the US in 30 years or so.. :)

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I believe the problem is, GM's fullsize van in Europe is a joint venture, they don't have their own design like FCA (horrible FWD POS) or Ford (Transit, much nicer) so they may not have the authority to commit to the fullsize van market here with their European fullsize vans.  I hope they don't hand the market over completely to Ford here in the U.S.

     

    On the other hand, Ford is caught with their pants down here in the U.S. in midsize trucks.  When they dropped the Ranger, they had the audacity to state that the FIESTA would take over as the vehicle of choice for Ranger customers... they held the completely erroneous notion that Ranger customers were more interested in a CHEAP VEHICLE than an actual small pickup truck... everyone can see how that panned out.  Fiesta sales aren't exactly taking up the slack... and I don't see any aftermarket Fiesta Ranchero conversions yet.  ;)

     

    Another point:  how will Ford market their Aussie Ranger here with a tried-and-true steel body, next to their aluminum F-series?  They would sound like hypocrites.

     

     

    ....and yet drew has no problem with blu's constant fight causing jabs at Ford.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I believe the problem is, GM's fullsize van in Europe is a joint venture, they don't have their own design like FCA (horrible FWD POS) or Ford (Transit, much nicer) so they may not have the authority to commit to the fullsize van market here with their European fullsize vans.  I hope they don't hand the market over completely to Ford here in the U.S.

     

    On the other hand, Ford is caught with their pants down here in the U.S. in midsize trucks.  When they dropped the Ranger, they had the audacity to state that the FIESTA would take over as the vehicle of choice for Ranger customers... they held the completely erroneous notion that Ranger customers were more interested in a CHEAP VEHICLE than an actual small pickup truck... everyone can see how that panned out.  Fiesta sales aren't exactly taking up the slack... and I don't see any aftermarket Fiesta Ranchero conversions yet.  ;)

     

    Another point:  how will Ford market their Aussie Ranger here with a tried-and-true steel body, next to their aluminum F-series?  They would sound like hypocrites.

     

     

    ....and yet drew has no problem with blu's constant fight causing jabs at Ford.

     

    Wings, this post you quoted has some positive remarks about Ford and their vans.  And you have to agree that dropping the Ranger and the reasoning they gave was off the mark.  Plus I think it is a valid point I brought up about the new Ranger, without denegrating the F-series.

    Edited by ocnblu
    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Indeed.

    Anyhoo, an extra 40,000 GM passenger trucks per year going into garages is a boon for GM's market share, especially with their half-tons still outstripping the competition as well.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    .

     

     

    Drew, honestly, preemptively modding remarks like that is strange.  Should I have qualified it as to why it would have helped?

    Interesting that you had no problem with his modding when you first came here.

    2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Intelligent discourse is the hallmark of any good forum. That is all that needs to be said in regards to that.

    Edited by El Kabong
    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

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

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor




  • Popular Stories

  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      Automakers go to great lengths to avoid being hit with the 25 percent chicken tax when they import trucks or vans into the U.S. Mercedes-Benz takes the cake for the most absurd method.
      For the past decade, Mercedes-Benz would build Sprinter vans fully in Germany before disassembling them and shipping the pieces to South Carolina. Workers in a small assembly building would put the vans back together. This method allowed Mercedes-Benz to claim the vans as "locally made".
      "I really couldn't believe it. To build up and tear down, that's really something that hurts me, personally. And the costs!" said Volker Mornhinweg, worldwide head of Mercedes-Benz Vans.
      Mornhinweg first learned about this back in 2010 and like us, found himself wondering 'WHY?!' Thankfully, Mornhinweg began working on making this process not seem like Rube Goldberg machine which will fully culminate with a new assembly plant in South Carolina that will be tasked with building the next-generation Sprinter, most likely in 2018.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required) 

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Automakers go to great lengths to avoid being hit with the 25 percent chicken tax when they import trucks or vans into the U.S. Mercedes-Benz takes the cake for the most absurd method.
      For the past decade, Mercedes-Benz would build Sprinter vans fully in Germany before disassembling them and shipping the pieces to South Carolina. Workers in a small assembly building would put the vans back together. This method allowed Mercedes-Benz to claim the vans as "locally made".
      "I really couldn't believe it. To build up and tear down, that's really something that hurts me, personally. And the costs!" said Volker Mornhinweg, worldwide head of Mercedes-Benz Vans.
      Mornhinweg first learned about this back in 2010 and like us, found himself wondering 'WHY?!' Thankfully, Mornhinweg began working on making this process not seem like Rube Goldberg machine which will fully culminate with a new assembly plant in South Carolina that will be tasked with building the next-generation Sprinter, most likely in 2018.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required) 
    • By William Maley
      Every Chevrolet Bolt that will be rolling off the assembly line will lose General Motors close to $9,000 once they are sold. This seems like madness, but according to a report from Bloomberg, there is some method to it. 
      Thanks to new regulations done by California Air Resources Board, automakers have to sell a certain amount of zero-emission vehicles if they want to sell other vehicles - primarily crossovers, SUVs, and trucks - in the state. These new regulations say by 2025, zero-emission vehicles need to make up 15.4 percent of the market. Since then, nine other states including New York have adopted these regulations. All told, these ten states make up 30 percent of the total U.S. auto market.
      Take for example Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. CEO Sergio Marchionne revealed a couple years back they take a hit of $14,000 on every Fiat 500e sold. But if they wanted to sell Ram pickups and Jeep SUVs in California, they need to take the hit.
      How does Bloomberg get the $9,000 figure? That's due to a source at General Motors who revealed the estimate is based on the Bolt's $37,500 base price. A GM spokesman declined to comment.
      If General Motors is able to sell enough Bolts, they'll be able to gather enough credits to not only sell other vehicles which will make up for the Bolt's loss, but also be able to sell extra credits to other automakers. Tesla has taken advantage of this to great effect. In the third quarter, Tesla made $139 million from selling credits.  
      Source: Bloomberg
       
       
       

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Every Chevrolet Bolt that will be rolling off the assembly line will lose General Motors close to $9,000 once they are sold. This seems like madness, but according to a report from Bloomberg, there is some method to it. 
      Thanks to new regulations done by California Air Resources Board, automakers have to sell a certain amount of zero-emission vehicles if they want to sell other vehicles - primarily crossovers, SUVs, and trucks - in the state. These new regulations say by 2025, zero-emission vehicles need to make up 15.4 percent of the market. Since then, nine other states including New York have adopted these regulations. All told, these ten states make up 30 percent of the total U.S. auto market.
      Take for example Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. CEO Sergio Marchionne revealed a couple years back they take a hit of $14,000 on every Fiat 500e sold. But if they wanted to sell Ram pickups and Jeep SUVs in California, they need to take the hit.
      How does Bloomberg get the $9,000 figure? That's due to a source at General Motors who revealed the estimate is based on the Bolt's $37,500 base price. A GM spokesman declined to comment.
      If General Motors is able to sell enough Bolts, they'll be able to gather enough credits to not only sell other vehicles which will make up for the Bolt's loss, but also be able to sell extra credits to other automakers. Tesla has taken advantage of this to great effect. In the third quarter, Tesla made $139 million from selling credits.  
      Source: Bloomberg
       
       
       
    • By William Maley
      As sales of compacts and sport cars begin declining, automakers are faced with tough decisions as to what in terms of production and workers. General Motors made the difficult decision to lay off 2,000 workers at two plants.
      Bloomberg reports that GM will be cutting the third shift at their Lansing Grand River plant in Michigan (home to Cadillac ATS, CTS, and Chevrolet Camaro) and a shift at Lordstown, Ohio plant (home to the Chevrolet Cruze). GM spokesman Tom Wickham said the company is treating the layoffs as permanent, although some workers will be able to transfer to other plants.
      The layoffs are due to sales of compact and sports cars going down due to consumers buying more crossovers. Sales of the Chevrolet Cruze dropped 20 percent through October, while the Camaro has seen a drop of 9 percent.
      On the same day, General Motors announced a $900 million investment for three plants - Toledo Transmission Operations, Bedford Casting Operations in Indiana, and Lansing Grand River. Wickham said this investment would not add any new jobs.
      Source: Bloomberg, General Motors
      Press Release is on Page 2


      General Motors today announced initiatives to strengthen and align its production output at key U.S. manufacturing operations. The plans include investing more than $900 million in three facilities — Toledo Transmission Operations in Ohio, Lansing Grand River in Michigan and Bedford Casting Operations in Indiana —  to prepare the facilities for future product programs.
      GM also announced plans to align production output with demand for cars built at the Lordstown, Ohio, and Lansing Grand River, Michigan, assembly plants. As the customer shift from cars to crossovers and trucks is projected to continue, GM will suspend the third shift of production at both facilities in the first quarter of 2017. 
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)