cdnsolman

I wonder how much the UAW and CAW will be complaining when GM closes every plant in all of North America due to financial trouble. The unrealistic wages and benefits they are demanding are what's sinking the company. The compromise will seem like a bargain after none of them have any work. I hear Honda is hiring for 1/2 what they make at GM. Maybe they can settle for that in a couple years.

I also think that Hummer should stay! It is an image brand that just needs work. Diesels would be a great start. The other thing GM needs to do is make room for the 4.2L I6 in more vehicles. I know as a fact they would sell lots more 6 cyl trucks if they got rid of that boat anchor of an engine they call the 4.3L V6. The 4.3L is worse on gas that my 5.3L. I have a Trailblazer with the 4.2L, it has lots of power, good towing ability, and great mileage, considering it has 4.10's. If they mated that engine with a 6 speed in an well equipped full size, in stead of a stripped down work truck, they would sell, and increase there MPG. If they sell an LTZ Malibu with a 4cyl, why not an LTZ truck with an I6? I don't agree on only leaving Chev, Saturn, GMC, and Cadillac. Buick has a better reputation, and history that Saturn, that's why when the award winning Aura came out, they still didn't sell like they expected. People don't know Saturn. And if Pontiac goes, so do the dreams of ever have a rear drive sedan besides Caddy. Couldn't GM raise the GVW on their fully-loaded half tons above the limit that require mileage calculated? Call them a "heavy half" and excempt them from the totals. With all the talk about different engines to save fuel and getting rid of V8's altogether, why couldn't they keep the V8 prestige and sound, but decrease the displacement to something like 4.0L and put a Turbo on it. Still a V8 for the enthusists like myself, but DI T/C AFM with a smaller displacement for fuel savings. Just a thoght.

The ultimate problem for GM, and why good ol' Bush has all but killed the Amercian Auto industry, is that they sell a million trucks every year... at least they did before fuel cost you a limb and a half per gallon. I was just wondering, I thought that trucks over a certain GVW were not held to that fuel economy standard, and therefore would not be counted in with all the rest of the vehicles for the corporate average of 35 MPG. Why couldn't GM classify all the high volume trucks, ie the fully loaded Z-71 and all the stripped down work rated trucks, as "heavy halfs." Raise the GVW on the vehicles that they sell the most of, and therefore eliminate them from the count. I also think it would be foolish to not investigate the advantage of a 240hp turbo I4 replacing a 240hp 3.9L V6. Instead of putting a 5.3L in everything, why not look at down sizing to the 4.8L turbocharged or shrink it to a 4.0L V8 with a couple of turbos. I don't think any truck owner is going to like replacing a big V8 with a turbo V6, why not replace it with a smaller turbo V8. (maybe with VVT, DI, AFM) The new 4.5L Duramax couldn't get here any faster, But they should also look at the 2.9L Diesel for all of the cars. Though I'm told that that diesel doesn't work for California, screw California, let them drive Volts and Aveo's. They should also look at a RWD CUV platform that would have 4WD with Low range as a possible replacement for the Tahoe, and maybe the Yukon and XL. The Acadia and it's sibblings are great vehicles with incredible space, but they don't haul the kind of weight that some SUV owners need (besides, FWD biased vehicles define light duty hauler. A rear drive V8 (or turbo V6) CUV beefed up to offer more space than a Tahoe because of the effeciency of CUV design, beefed up to pull 7000lbs might convince Tahoe owners to settle for a CUV, and would be lighter and more fuel efficient the the BOF. With the technology they are putting into these vehicles, why couldn't they put an economy mode on some of there vehicles? Think about the Cobalt SS T/C. They have performance mode with Launch Control, couldn't they have economy mode where they dial back the boost, fuel, timing and detune the engine for max effieciency? In stop and got traffic, you don't need much power, so cut it off to save fuel. Even if GM meets the new CAFE limits, the Automotive Journalist will squash them anyway. All the new vehcles GM makes are appearently not as good as Honda, because it doesn't ride like a Honda, or feel like a Honda. Of course it doesn't it isn't a Honda, but the auto jounalists like the feel of a Honda, therefore the GM isn't as good. Case in point, the CX-9 beat the Enclave because it is more of a drivers vehicle. Even in an eight passenger, they want the one that will take the corner the fastest, not the one that rides the best or has the best balence. Unbiast Journalism, and some new vehicle innovation, and GM will be fine, God I hope they do other wise I will always drive older vehicles. one last point, the heavy tax on fuel and it's high price is supposed to be a fuel saver to reduce emissions, but because I can't afford to drive my truck, I just ride my 1981 smog machine of a motorcycle that pollutes way more than my truck in spite of getting 3 times the mileage. Yah good call.

The problem with your statement is that there are many Plants in Ontario Canada building the highest quality vehicles that are shipped to all of North America, and yet we are still paying more for them. They don't have to cross the border or anything. Canadian workers building Canadian cars in Canada for Americans. That's just as bad as us producing oil and manufacturing Gasoline in Alberta, and paying the 25% more at the pumps for it. They bend us over because our economy is high, but mostly because we let them.

If anybody was dumb enough to pay full price for a vehicle, why is that Honda's, GM's, or Jeep's fault. We've known that prices were significantly cheaper in the states for years, why now are they complaining. How about before you sign the lease. Has any body out there heard of the term "as is where is?" It means if you didn't do your research, you are the one to blame, not the company you purchase it from. I hope the lawyer knows that after this is all over, he is going to get sued for overcharging them.