[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AgentR', '
')Put bluntly, I have more emotional attachment to one of my random shovels than I do to any car, which is, not much. Its a tool; it exists to support my activities; I do not exist to keep it well fed and pretty.

[vision-master]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hat said, I don't think this is going to save any of the big 3. My kids view cars as appliances, nothing more. They, and their friends, had no heritage like that. We built muscle cars. My kids' friends put coffee can pipes on the mufflers of their Honda Civics. Our cars looked like crap but hauled ass. Theirs looked good and bored you to tears. It's a generational thing and I don't see the same connection with the American cars like when I was a kid.

[MarkJ]

Our teenage daughters love V8 powered American Sports Cars and boats, but they've grown up in a large family of gearheads.

Many teenagers have grown up in non mechanically inclined households with little exposure to V8 powered real wheel drive sports cars, boats, auto maintenance, repairs, customization, fabrication, garages, lifts, jacks, tools, compressors, torches, welders, test equipment etc.

Due to their lack of knowledge, skills, experience, tools and equipment much modern customization is often limited to cosmetic improvements. FWD systems, AWD systems, limited space, turbocharging, electronics, computerization, emissions systems and tougher state inspections also make it tougher to perform engine/transmission/suspension upgrades and swaps.

I love the simplicity of working on cars, boats and other toys with nearly unlimited space to work, customize and fabricate.

[timmatoil]

Twelve-month automobile sales in the United States have fallen to their lowest level since the recession of 1982, according to the Associated Press (see here). The story adds that sales for January 2009 fell 37% across the board, in spite of sales promotions. Both American and Japan manufacturers were hard hit, with GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota and Nissan falling 40% or more. The only bright spots were Japan’s Subaru, which gained 8%, and Korea’s Hyundai, which gained 14%. Auto industry (especially North American) continuing to get crushed.

[PeakOiler]

CNN article:

http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/17/news/companies/auto_plans/index.htm?postversion=2009021716

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')EW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- General Motors and Chrysler LLC said Tuesday they could need an additional $21.6 billion in federal loans between them because of worsening demand for their cars and trucks.

The two firms, in documents submitted to the Treasury Department, also detailed plans to cut 50,000 jobs worldwide by the end of the year. GM said it plans to close five more plants in the next few years and confirmed it will drop some of its weaker brands.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PeakOiler', 'C')NN article:

http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/17/news/companies/auto_plans/index.htm?postversion=2009021716

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')EW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- General Motors and Chrysler LLC said Tuesday they could need an additional $21.6 billion in federal loans between them because of worsening demand for their cars and trucks.

The two firms, in documents submitted to the Treasury Department, also detailed plans to cut 50,000 jobs worldwide by the end of the year. GM said it plans to close five more plants in the next few years and confirmed it will drop some of its weaker brands.

[vision-master]

You must want riches to rags, eh?

[IslandCrow]

Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7901027.stm


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he board of the Swedish carmaker Saab, which is owned by General Motors, has filed for reorganisation, seeking protection from its creditors.

The reorganisation process is the Swedish equivalent of going into Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the US.
.....
Sales at Saab in 2008 were down 25% on the previous year.

The Swedish carmaker has not made a profit since 2001

[timmatoil]

For General Motors and Chrysler to come begging to Washington for even more bailout money twice in one week is a woeful economic indicator. How much longer can they survive?

[Denny]

Some even grimmer news, for GM especially.

See [url]http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/03/autos/gm_volt.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2009030313]Fortune: Taking the charge out of the Chevy Volt[/url]

It seems GM didn't do their calculations correctly on the cost-benefits of the Volt. Carnegie-Mellon University worked out the economics and finds that the intended larger battery size for the Volt to reach the 40 mile distance threshold is not logical for a plug-in hybrid. It makes it too expensive to buy and too expensive over the long term operatioins cost too.

Also, an economist now has worked out that the U.S.A. has far too much auto production capacity going into the future, so a lot of the auto business bail out money is not economic, its time to contract. And, as we look into a future of constrained oil capacity, this is just common sense, right?

See [url]http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1331882]Third of North America's Auto Plants Surplus[/url]

"Automobile production is "out of alignment in North America," Mr. Gomes said. "Additional capacity restructuring will be required."

Even after the latest round of assembly capacity cuts announced in recent weeks, GM, Chrysler and Ford Motor Co. still have the power to build 10 million vehicle per year in North America, well above the 7.2 million vehicles they built in 2008, the economist said. "

Who believes that, as the big three shrink their product offerings, they will ever see the magnitude of sales they had just two years ago? The bests are on for the "off shore" makes to retain and grow market share instead. I can see it in traveling in North America. Where you see younger markets, you invariably see a high level of off shore makes. Where you see mature markets, like Florida, you see the majority are the trational big three, especially GM, but these market segments are shrinking, they are literally dying off.

I think it would make far more sense for Obama's team to look at real automotive restructuring, along the lines of the World War II experience. Shift from cars to mass transit or even windmills, something useful. America will never need to return to the high level of auto production it once had. Putting billions and billions of dollars into automotive bailouts is like throwing good money after bad. You can keep GM and Chrysler alive on paper, but that won't improve the job prospects in the largest part of the auto business, parts production. Those jobs strictly depend on the number of cars sold, and that won't improve just because GM and Chrysler are still technically in business.

[Maddog78]

GM's rebuttal to CM study.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')ur Real-World Learnings Differ From CMU Study
By Jon Lauckner
Vice President Global Program Management

This past weekend, I read some media reports about a study by Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) questioning the wisdom of vehicles like the Chevy Volt that offer more than a “token” level of gasoline-free driving. I’ve been deeply involved in the development of the Volt from the beginning, so I took some time to download and read the report to see what new insight the CMU study offered.

First of all, we appreciate CMU’s interest and efforts in furthering the research and knowledge about the future of electric vehicle transportation. Only by truly understanding the capabilities and benefits of plug-in electric vehicles will we be able to transition from vehicles primarily dependent on petroleum.

However, what we’ve learned during the development of the Chevy Volt differs from the study’s stated conclusion:

“The best choice of PHEV battery capacity depends critically on the distance that the vehicle will be driven between charges. Our results suggest that for urban driving conditions and frequent charges every 10 miles or less, a low-capacity PHEV sized with an AER (range) of about 7 miles would be a robust choice for minimizing gasoline consumption, cost and greenhouse gas emissions.” (pg. 22)

I’ll cut to the chase; for starters, the study’s endorsement of plug-in vehicles with only a “token” electric-only range (seven miles) overlooks the inconvenience of recharging for the vast majority of drivers (approx. 90 percent) with a daily commute that exceeds seven miles. I mean, honestly, how many customers are going to stop every seven miles and wait at least 30 minutes (if a car has a high-capacity charger like the Volt with the same level of electrical energy to match it) for their battery to be recharged? Without having done any market research, I’m guessing the answer is “very few”. And, if customers don’t recharge during the day, these “token” plug-ins will run primarily on gasoline. How is that consistent with reducing green house gas emissions and our dependence on petroleum?

At its core, the study’s conclusion is based on an incorrect assumption of the cost of battery packs. In the CMU study, the so-called “base case” used a Lithium-Ion battery cost of $1,000 per kWh ($16,000 for a 40 mile Volt pack) that was cited in earlier academic articles. The problem is this cost is many hundreds of dollars per kWh higher than the actual cost of the Volt pack today. Moreover, our battery team is already starting work on new concepts that will further decrease the cost of the Volt battery pack quite substantially in a second-generation Volt pack. Unfortunately, the impact of dramatically lower battery costs (to $250 per kWh) was treated only as a “sensitivity” in the CMU study when it probably should have been highlighted as THE critical element that would dramatically change the cost-effectiveness of plug-ins with greater electric-only range.

The study also failed to include incentives for customers and producers of plug-in vehicles that have already been legislated. In fact, the recently passed “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act” (HR1) reconfirmed customer incentives that were included in an earlier bill passed last year for vehicles with a grid rechargeable battery pack. The legislation provides a Federal Tax credit ranging from $2,500 for 4four kWh battery packs to a maximum of $7,500 for customers of full-scale commercial plug-in electric vehicles. So, the PHEV-7 (3kWh battery) advocated in the CMU study would receive “zero” tax credit, while a Chevy Volt (16 kWh battery) with 40 miles of electric range will receive the maximum Federal Tax credit of $7,500. The State of Michigan, where we plan to produce the Volt battery pack, has also legislated incentives for manufacturers of battery packs and cells. So, when more realistic battery costs and customer and producer incentives are included, the calculations (and conclusions?) in the CMU study should change very significantly.

The bottom line is there isn’t anything in this study that would change the decisions we made for the Chevy Volt. We think a plug-in offering 40 miles of gas- and emissions-free driving like the Volt is the sweet spot for the majority of customers because nearly 80 percent of drivers can drive their daily commute and return home for an overnight recharge that avoids inconvenience for them and additional daytime load on the electric grid.

Actually, as I read the conclusions of the study I had a feeling of déjà vu. Some years ago, GM didn’t introduce hybrid technology as quickly as we should have because it wasn’t considered “cost effective” at the time - and we aren’t going to make that mistake again. In fact, the more vehicles powered by the Voltec system we can put on the road, the faster we’ll see the costs for batteries, power electronics and electric drive motors come down due to economies of scale and innovation. This will lead to even greater adoption of plug-ins and a new way forward for our industry.

[PWALPOCO]

Substantial Doubt for GM future - BBC News


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here is "substantial doubt" about the ability of General Motors (GM) to stay afloat, the firm's auditors have said.

Ongoing losses and the struggle to generate cashflow meant the firm's ability to continue as a going concern should be questioned, they added.

[Minvaren]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')bama, in an interview with CBS' "Face the Nation" broadcast Sunday, said the companies must do more to receive additional financial aid from the government.

"They're not there yet," Obama said.

[Keith_McClary]

Is this funny?

New Camaro Turns Heads in Manhattan

[Revi]

There are three car companies in the US and Canada poised to take over now.

Zenn, Tesla and Aptera can make the cars we need in the 21st century.

GM makes SUV's.

Let them die like the gas guzzling dinosaurs they are.

[Maddog78]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', 'I')s this funny?

New Camaro Turns Heads in Manhattan

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Maddog78', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', 'I')s this funny?

New Camaro Turns Heads in Manhattan

[Maddog78]

This car has been in the planning stages for at least 4 yrs. Remember 4 yrs. ago when everything was going swimmingly and SUV's were selling like crazy?
It has over 15,000 preorders.
The Mustang, it's competitor, has always been a best seller for Ford.
By all accounts it looks like this Camaro will be a runaway success.

Sure, they should have also been developing better compact sedans at the same time but I don't have a problem with this Camaro.

I have to laugh at the Model T comparisons. I heard a talking head on MSNBC say the same. As if they (and you apparently) seem to have no idea of the safety and emission laws that have been enacted recently.
It's not just GM. Even foreign manufacturers cars are getting bigger and heavier and really get no better mileage than the domestics.

[timmatoil]

The equities markets seem to becoming unmoored from economic reality, the Stock Research Portal says. How, he asks, could “the failure of either Chrysler or GM could be other than negative for the US dollar”?
Conclusion: “The people who write about these things must think in terms of ‘hour to hour,’ may not know who Warren Buffett is, and certainly don’t understand his investment philosophy.”

Via Stock Research Portal (http://www.stockresearchportal.com)