2006 Monte Carlo

[gonenuts15792]

Originally Posted by drunken monkey

well, between the how-ever many billions lost in share prices, masses of job cuts and various sub-brands being stopped it doesn't actually sound like GM are doing that well.

and before one of the mods jumps in, this is an international forum.
to me, an american car is an import.

Masses of job cuts? Really they have announced cuts of 25,000 jobs by the end of the decade, due to healthcare costs and upgrading the factories to be even more efficient. Sub Brands being stopped? what are you talking about, they killed Oldsmobile a few years ago, that's it.

That last sentence explains a lot....

[gonenuts15792]

Originally Posted by drunken monkey

well, i tried to get it back on track but that guy insists on (blindly) praising GM despite the list of faults that people here have been presenting.

how about another try?

do you think the monte carlo is a good car?
my response would be that it, being a press release picture and hence may not be truely representative of the real thing, isn't looking too good.

List of faults huh, well yeah GM does have some it's one of the oldest car companies around, with much more responsibility than toyota or any of those other manufacturers have.


Any car manufacturer has faults, but I guess you can't figure that out. Most of the reason you are hearing about GM so much is because GM is the biggest car company in the world and the media here in the states likes to paint GM as a big mean monster that can't do anything right, whole drinking toyota and hondas cool-aid.

[kman10587]

They aren't surviving on loyalty cash back, and obviously you have no idea about GM products what so ever when you're spouting about all the SUVs and trucks being beaten by toyota, nissan, mercedes(wtf the only SUVs they make are the biggest jokes around, same thing with BMW). The 5 cylinder gets better gas mileage and similiar torque and HP ratings of competitors V6 engines. Their SUVs and Trucks have better engines (higher torque ratings, higher HP ratings), the engines are some of the most highly respected in the industry, and the tundra and tacoma, and titan missed on all those points, and as I said before, if you think the tacoma and tundras interiors are more comfortable and nicer than a Ford or GMs interior you have a screw loose, same thing with their SUVs. They are smaller, less powerful, more expensive in some cases than comparable Ford or GM models, and to top it off they get worse gas mileage. Nope rebates and patriotism don't play as big of a part as you think, when you compare these vehicles side by side it's a fact you are getting more buying a Ford or GM than you are buying a toyota, nissan (missed it's sales mark but a wide margin), or those other jokes from BMW or Mercedes (while we're here, the SRX is considered the bench mark for all other luxury crossovers to follow, not those BMW and Mercedes ones).

Okay.

Nice try, go back to loving your gas sippng Camry ricer, and praying for the environment. Oh and research the upcoming GMT900 trucks and SUVs. Toyota is playing catchup trying to design competitors to 1995 GM trucks and SUVs and GMs moving ahead even more. toyota tundra texas edition, what a joke.

Now you're being an asshole. My Camry is a ricer car? It was built in Kentucky, you dumbass. I wouldn't call it a gas sipper either, it only gets around 20 miles per gallon in the city; yes, it has a V6 in there. And I'm not an environmentalist by any means, hell, I'm not even sticking up for them, I'm just pointing out the obvious facts. I don't pray for the environment; in fact, I don't pray for jack shit period. So you can take your extremist stereotypes about me and shove them.

Bottom line: I don't like most of GM's current product. I don't think they're making very many good cars, trucks, and SUVs, and judging by how much money they lose each year on their vehicles, I'd say that I'm more right than you are.

[gonenuts15792]

Well by the looks of your signature you'd love to have it as a ricer....

Yes GM is loosing Money, but if you'd just look and realize what products are coming out you'd see something.... hell it has to be something good if the media who has seen it is praising them. Some of the reporters who have seen them are some of the most biased people against GM.

One of the major problems for GM is public perception caused by the biased media who likes to paint GM as a company who is environmentally unfriendly, builds shitty products, and doesn't care what you want. They dig any little piece of dirt up that they can about GM and then make sure it's allover the news. The general public listens and automatically thinks GM is bad, without doing any research. It's like the fuel economy numbers, many of GMs vehicles get better gas mileage than their competitors (look at the SUVs) but the media still paints GM as a gas guzzling SUV maker.

[Jimster]

Originally Posted by gonenuts15792

Well by the looks of your signature you'd love to have it as a ricer....

That's a Touring car, not a ricer.





Anyway, basically, to sum up what I think, GM nowdays is about where the BMC was after the Allegro had come and gone, it stands to reason.

The media has every right to bag GM, would you trust your best friend straight after he slept with your wife? No, so why should the media not be suspicious of GM after years of constant crap.

[gonenuts15792]

Originally Posted by Jimster

That's a Touring car, not a ricer.





Anyway, basically, to sum up what I think, GM nowdays is about where the BMC was after the Allegro had come and gone, it stands to reason.

The media has every right to bag GM, would you trust your best friend straight after he slept with your wife? No, so why should the media not be suspicious of GM after years of constant crap.

Right, that's why I see ricers going up and down the street that look awful similiar....

Oh and I'm betting that wing just does so much for the stability of the car.... [Sarcasm]

[kman10587]

One of the major problems for GM is public perception caused by the biased media who likes to paint GM as a company who is environmentally unfriendly, builds shitty products, and doesn't care what you want. They dig any little piece of dirt up that they can about GM and then make sure it's allover the news. The general public listens and automatically thinks GM is bad, without doing any research. It's like the fuel economy numbers, many of GMs vehicles get better gas mileage than their competitors (look at the SUVs) but the media still paints GM as a gas guzzling SUV maker.

That's fine, but I actually have done my research, and I still don't think GM is a very good company. I have no qualms with their fuel economy, or their engines in general; it's their reputation for bad build quality, wishy-washy marketing strategy, and refusal to embrace the newer generation's desires that makes them a failing company.

Oh yeah, that's not a ricer in my signature, that's a race car. It has a racing engine, racing suspension, and racing chassis. And unlike the riced-out Camrys you see so frequently on the streets, the wing on this one isn't just for looks, it's for giving the car rear traction. That usually isn't necessary on a FWD car, but just from looking at the ride height, you can deduce that the car's suspension setup is strongly biased towards frontal grip; the rear wing is there to help keep it reasonably stable during rear slides. Even I can do small slides in my stock Camry by braking late and hard enough, so I can imagine what it would be able to do with a race-tuned suspension.

[Jaguar D-Type]

Let's just close this thread and move on...

[drunken monkey]

feed a guy shit all his life and he gets to love it.

[gonenuts15792]

Originally Posted by kman10587

That's fine, but I actually have done my research, and I still don't think GM is a very good company. I have no qualms with their fuel economy, or their engines in general; it's their reputation for bad build quality....

Yeah that's why the most recent JD Powers long term reliability survey has GM placing first in 8 segments, more than any other manufacturer including toyota which only led in 4 categories, ford outperformed toyota and honda too....


Just think that's for 2002 model year vehicles, imagine how GM and Ford are doing with 2004, 2005, and 2006 models.... Two Words public perception, that's what holds GM back now... People to lazy to research stuff themselves so they listen to the media who is stuck in the 70s...

http://www.jdpa.com/pdf/2005089.pdf

[kman10587]

I think that you are a far too trusting person. A couple of successes in recent polls (which are highly subjective) should not take precedence over twenty years of consistently bad build quality. Maybe GM has recovered, and their product is now perfectly fine, but I'll wait a few more years and see how those 2002 models are holding up in 2012. Automotive reliability and build quality is not the kind of thing I take chances with.

[gonenuts15792]

Well look at my signature for proof GM builds great cars. Buick park Avenu with 210,000 plus miles on it and runs as good as it did the day it was drove off the dealer lot. GM has consistently been improving in all the surveys over the past years. Don't take my word on it, try a new GM car out...

[Jimster]

Originally Posted by gonenuts15792

Well look at my signature for proof GM builds great cars. Buick park Avenu with 210,000 plus miles on it and runs as good as it did the day it was drove off the dealer lot. GM has consistently been improving in all the surveys over the past years. Don't take my word on it, try a new GM car out...

Now you're REALLY sounding like a guy from a GM ad.

[mason_RsX]

Originally Posted by gonenuts15792

One of the major problems for GM is public perception caused by the biased media who likes to paint GM as a company who is environmentally unfriendly, builds shitty products, and doesn't care what you want. They dig any little piece of dirt up that they can about GM and then make sure it's allover the news. The general public listens and automatically thinks GM is bad, without doing any research. It's like the fuel economy numbers, many of GMs vehicles get better gas mileage than their competitors (look at the SUVs) but the media still paints GM as a gas guzzling SUV maker.

Im sorry man I dont wanna be another one to attack your views but I just don't agree

Environmentally unfriendly is a fact with SUV's & trucks and GM has been pumping them out non-stop...Im less harsh on trucks because ppl need them...but SUV's are the worst and GM is the king of the SUV

Shitty products? the computer died on our Olds Bravada at 40,000km on our way to a funeral...had to be towed back, cost us $300 under warranty...it has had numerous 4WD problems, along with electronics failures, ect (that I6 is amazing tho!)...on the other hand...our 2001 Mazda Protege (still relatively free from Ford influences) has been absolutely abused by me, I freely admit it...and now at 120,000km we have had the brakes fixed once, and the tires replaced...thats it...now how do you expect me to have a positive opinion from my experience with GM?

lastly...GM up until now hasn't cared what we wanted...I followed the 25,000 lay off + restructuring plan very closely on TV and all the automotive business experts have continued to say "GM has not been making cars that people want to buy, they have been making inferior products to Honda, Toyota and then throwing incentives around" I didnt say it...automotive experts said it, not me

[BlackGT2000]

I am not taking sides here at all. I agree that Buick and Oldsmobile have been making boring cars and I really don't know or really care how they run, they spark no interest in me. However, I don't think GM is in any major trouble. Cutting 25000 people isn't as bad as it seems. It happens all the time and it will continue to as long as things get more efficient. The US Navy has cut 30000 sailors in the last 2 years, is the navy weaker? No, its just more automated and we don't need people to do some of the things we used to do manually in the past. It may have been a bit behind the times and needed to catch up with other companys that already were more efficient and may have just not hired those workers to begin with. The fact is that GM is pretty much kicking butt in the SUV dept. To say they are evil for making something environemtally friendly is pretty short sighted. All auto makers in america are after a piece of the SUV craze, even toyota, nissan, and now honda (and of course all the other american car companies). Its a business, they aren't out to help the environment, they are out to sell cars. I think that GM trucks and full size cars have always been competitive. I think there is plenty of fanboys on both sides of this issue. As the issue stands now in 05 I think that chevy has been putting out some cool stuff and some possibly bad ideas, but that happens with all cars. They can't all be the best. The Cobalt is brand new the corvette is new they have the colorado (which I liked alot surprisingly after the crap people talked about it). I think the 06 monte carlo is stupid, but I think alot of cars are stupid. I think the Element, vibe/aztek, montecarlo, Murano, Scion Xa/Xb, new eclipse and pretty much all hyundais and kias are all stupid looking or just dumb concepts. There are tons of cars that people don't like. If someone thinks that the quality between a 99 cavalier and a 99 civic are different, I would say they are right. But when those cars were new the Cavalier was noticably cheaper and thats what the consumer was looking for. I know gonenuts is coming off as a diehard chevy fanatic (which he very well may be) but I think he's just trying to bring up valid points but between the different flames back and forth it gets lost in brand loyalty and patriotism and reverse patriotism. In short this is all a business and no matter what company you talk about, it is out to get you to buy a new car, they would sell everyone a car that only ran for 10 minutes if they knew it would sell.