GM responds to Boston Globe critique
Earlier this month, an editorial writer for the Boston Globe wrote a piece entitled the 'Folly of automakers' in which he lambastes Detroit's big-two-point-five, and specifically GM, for producing too many large SUVs and generally ignoring the trend towards smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles.
GM, not content with being denigrated in public, wrote a retort, which was not published in the Boston Globe, due to their policy of not printing op-ed responses. However, the Miami Herald, who also published Derrick Jackson's column on the automakers, did allow a portion of GM's response to be published in their 'letters to the editor' section.
As is often the case, the General wanted their side of the argument voiced in its entirety, and so, GM's Fast Lane Blog enters from stage left.
General Motors' veep of Global Communications, Steven Harris, took Jackson's column to task, pointing out that reading four columns about the auto industry does not an analyst make and going so far as to list off all of GM's accomplishments towards reducing fuel consumption and America's reliance on foreign oil. Most of his points are well made, although their claim of making more 30-MPG vehicles than any other manufacturer can be debated, as real world experience has shown that the EPA's estimates are "optimistic."
Our interest is mainly centered on the argument and how each party makes their case. Your thoughts, as always, are welcomed.
[Source: Boston Globe, GM Fast Lane Blog]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg "2011 Audi A8: Live from Miami")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Hamud 7:56AM (9/19/2006)
I guess people in north-america are overrating about the gas prices and car's consumption. Not that this is not important, but hey, we pay more than 2,2 Reals (local currency) for each liter of gasoline and the medium income here is way lower than yours in north-america.
I love american cars, all of them, mainly from the big 2.5 and i would have no problem in getting a car with personality, power and a GM, Ford or Chrysler logo in the front grille instead of a low consumption, no personality, no fun to drive, Toyota. What's the point on getting around in a car that does 40 MPG if you don't enjoy the ride??? That would be my case with a Prius. At the end of the month i would have a little more money on my pocket and a well made, reliable mean of transportation in my garage. But, sincerely? I don't want a well made and reliable mean of transportation, i want an automobile, a car that makes me smille when i look at it, that makes me proud of my purschasing and not a car that makes me remember that when i fill up the tank i save some money.
Only my two cents.
Reply
Odyssey67 4:26PM (9/20/2006)
I've driven the Prius and it's got better handling characteristics than most give it credit for. But that's besides the point - the issue here is whether GM should be responding to critics who are only pointing out the obvious (that it missed the big neon signs as far back as the late 90s, that indicated fuel efficiency would only b/c more important as time went on), or whether they should just take their lumps and get on with the business of straightening their mess out.
Personally, I vote for the latter.
Let me say for the record that I think GM is making some of the best cars & trucks in it's history. I think they are on the right track specifically with the Equinox, the Cobalt, the HHR, the Malibu Maxx, the Colorado, and the Avalanche. All are winning designs (inside AND out) at good price points. A few years ago I would never have thought I'd ever see such good cars from the General. The rest of their line-up needs some work to 'un-plain' them, but considering how far behind the curve Ford is in that department, it's a good base for GM to move forward from.
However, the sad but true fact is that GM - like Ford - let the ball drop when it came to engineering. It is particularly glaring that GM has almost no diesels in their line-up, except for big trucks. These big bore gas hogs are another area where they took the easy way out. The Japanese & Europeans are doing wonders with smaller displacements and turbo/supercharging - why are we still living in the 60s?? Style-wise, I have no problem with 'retro', but 'cutting edge' should always be under the sheetmetal.
Also lacking are GM's relatively antiquated transmissions. Frankly, 6speed autos AND manuals (very important for keeping fuel economy numbers up) are the bare minimum of what's acceptable these days, in every car/truck, and shouldn't be something a company like GM needs to outsource, or partner, or take forever to accomplish. If they want to get ambitious, they should develop a CVT too, but enough of the current slushboxes that are perennially a gear or two short.
Last I would say that all automakers should be working on a crash weight-loss program for their vehicles, no exceptions. Cars & trucks today are way too heavy considering how much materials technology is available.
Those are my 'Quick Three' suggestions for both the domestics. Stop wasting time and money on American Idol celebrity ads and 'answering the critics' ... your situation is too dire for needless excersices. Get to work.
Reply
Jason 8:41AM (9/19/2006)
Derrick Jackson is probably the worst of the Globe columnists, and I've been reading that editorial page for years now. Take a look at his previous columns (http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/jackson/)
and you will see a trend of arguments that make absolutely no sense, exaggerations, labels, poor fact checking and so on.
I'm generally pretty much a moderate person politically, and will generally listen to anyone of any political bent, but Derrick really needs to look deeper into what he's saying. But of course in today's age of black/white, left/right, right/wrong with no gray areas, you don't need to bother with that because you are always preaching to your personal choir and they adore you for it.
Reply
FourBanger 8:50AM (9/19/2006)
I think the only leg GM has to stand on is the "everyone else is doing it, so why not us?" argument--at the other end of the Prius, Toyota has the big honkin' Tundra and Sequoia behemoths. And let's remember what the best-selling vehicle in the US is--a Ford F-150.
Other than that, GM is just as guilty as most other automakers of making a pretty cynical attempt to exploit many Americans' meatheadedness. "Arggh, me want truck, make me big and strong--fun to tailgate sedans on highway--headlights go right into driver's eye! ARghhh!" Automakers are better than most other industries at convincing people they need something they didn't know they needed. Like the pickup bed you use once a year to get rid of an old couch--yeah, that's a good reason to buy a truck. Or 4wd in the winter--90 percent of the population would be just fine waiting a couple hours for the plows to come through and clear the streets. And then there's the ultra-cynical ploy to get women on board--"I just like being up high--gives me a commanding view of the road." Ugh. "It's big, it just makes me feel safer." Ugh. Ugh.
GM can nitpick all it wants with editorial writers, but in general, the point stands--most people, enthusiasts included, would be just fine with a four-cylinder sedan or wagon most of the time. And we'd be better off for it. And I don't think the typical comeback--"we're just feeding a demand in the marketplace" flies anymore. Cigarette companies also fill a demand in the marketplace.
Reply
Rob 8:51AM (9/19/2006)
hamud,
i smile every time i look at my japanese/american-made acura and driving it to work each day makes my drive a whole lot more pleasant... and by the way, people are obviously not looking for a sporty, fun ride when they buy a prius - they are usually buying it for the perks (carpool lane usage, fuel consumption). people want different things from their cars and that reflects the car market.
and you sincerely don't want a reliable, well made means of transportation? wow.
Reply
Steve B 9:19AM (9/19/2006)
I'm still trying to find what car GM produces that makes at least a combined 30 mpg, even by EPA ratings. I can't find one. Surprisingly, even the roller-skate sized Aveo doesn't!
Wait, the Toyota-built Pontiac Vibe does it!
I guess they are talking about highway mileage. When you fill up your car each week, you can think about how much money you'll save on that once a year road trip.
Reply
Hamud 9:23AM (9/19/2006)
Rob, Acura is another history, Honda is another history, they know how to do very nice if not almost perfect cars. Actually my first car will be a Honda. I was only talking about Toyota's cars.
There's some differences in producing good cars and producing good cars that people want to buy not only because its benefits, but because of the car itself, its design.
I bet you look at your Acura and feel good doing it, don't you? Something inside tells you everyday that you bought the right car, right? If you had a Toyota, problably you will fell the same, but it wouldn't have much to do with the car design.
I would like to clarify that i don't have nothing against japanese cars, even calling myself as "american car lover".
As a Mech. Engineer i'm looking forward to learn about japanese means of prodution to implement at my work, cause i know they are the best in what they do.
My main issue is with the lack of design and personality on Toyota's cars. Has nothing to do with the fact that they are japanese.
So, i want a well made, reliable and also good looking mean of transportation.
PS. Have you seen the pictures of the next Corolla?? Boring...
Reply
Fustang Sally 10:00AM (9/19/2006)
The real problem faced by the American companies is that they cannot build a competetive car with the high labor costs they now have. When you build a truck or SUV that returns several thousand dollars in profit you can operate with high labor costs. When you have to rely on a small car where your profit may be several hundred dollars you cannot continue carrying those costs. The people to blame for this are those Union and Management people who wrote and agreed to contracts offering the pension and health care benefits that these(now much smaller)companies are carrying. One can't blame the US auto industry for building trucks and SUVs, it was probably what kept them alive for the last 25 years. Our government should have nipped the switch to trucks and SUVs in the bud by the simple means of making light trucks and SUVs passenger cars, thus meeting all safety, emissions and corporate fuel economy standards as cars do. As for GM comments on Toyota, yes they make trucks and SUVs, but if you took that part of their business away they still are a viable company with their car lines. Can you say the same about GM?
Reply
AZMike 10:08AM (9/19/2006)
GM DOES use EPA data when they compare their fuel economy. what else would they use? it just hurts to see the truth, doesn't it?
all companies are in the business of providing people with goods and services that they want. if they don't, they're out of business. it people didn't want large vehicles, they wouldn't be available.
it always amazes me to see such short-sighted people; we can have a disaster like Katrina last year, where fuel prices jumped 50 cents per gallon in a matter of HOURS. of course, the auto companies are at fault for not building more fuel-efficient vehicles.
where do you buy your crystal ball?
everything Steve Harris said is right on the mark. I always look at life with everything on a LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. ALL the Japanese automakers walked away from their humble economy car beginnings in the US ten years ago, today offering just a sprinkling of small models to satisfy this ever-shrinking segment of the market.
now, they shove in a few home market, teeny shitboxes (Fit, Yaris, Versa), and they're heroes. they (just like their American counterparts) chose to go where the volume was, in trucks and medium and large size SUVs. why are they not faulted, especially considering their models are not as fuel-efficient in this segment as their "poorly made" American counterparts? how long will it take for the new, teeny shitboxes to go the way of the timeless, classic Toyota Echo? the Echo offered outstanding fuel economy, and a low price, too. and don't tell me how ugly it was; these new offerings are just as butt-ugly, too. maybe Nissan should re-introduce the Datsun Honey Bee. now there was a looker!
I've been thru every 'fuel crisis' since the one back in '73. time has proven (EVERY time) that when fuel prices drop, we go back and buy what we really want to drive.
hey, if that little teeny car gets you all hot, get it. and you know what? I'll never berate you for buying it, because from where I'm sitting, I don't have to ever ride in it, pay for it, or insure it. it kind of funny how it never works the other way isn't it? must be no rest for the pompous.
the comments about fuel economy not being 'real world' accurate are certainly correct; I always EXCEED the highway mileage. and not all of us care too much about the city fuel economy; the nearest traffic signal is 26 miles from my house.
my 2006 Dodge Ram pickup is rated at 15/19; the lowest I've seen for city is 17, and regularly get over 20 on the highway. my lowly 1990 Buick Reatta (3800 V-6, 407,000 miles) averages 32 MPG all the time. my Cadillac deVille is rated at 19/25; the lowest I've every seen is 21.1, and the fuel computer is sitting right now at 27.7. by the way, I haven't reset the computer in over 30,000 miles, so the highway number is not a fluke. damn American junk!!
you are right that the EPA numbers aren't always right, though. it seems to be common knowledge that the much vaunted (and recalled) Prius actually gets in the 40's for mileage in the real world; it's EPA rated for over 60 MPG. and all that for a price just south of $30,000...unless you have to pay over MSRP.
sorry for confusing the issue with facts.
Mike
Reply
Tri-Bob 10:12AM (9/19/2006)
I think it is amusing that people always pick on Ford and GM. Does the big 0.5 (aka - Chrysler) even have a hybrid, E85, hydrogen car? This is just writing an argumentative piece for publicity when the writer has a complete lack of imagination and/or ability.
Reply
akatsuki 10:19AM (9/19/2006)
The real problem is not making money on SUVs when you can. The problem is that US automakers don't invest into technology or fixing fundamental problems. They could have worked on fixing their pension problems or developing green technology when SUVs were hot. Howvever, instead they took that money to the bank and left small cars to languish. You would think the OPEC embargo would have taught US manufacturers that you need to be investing at all levels all the time...
Reply
AZMike 10:26AM (9/19/2006)
Tri-Bob,
Chrysler will have 75% of it's fleet E85 compatible for 2007, more than any other company. also, look for the hybrid Durango; more models to follow.
Mike
Reply
Rob 11:49AM (9/19/2006)
OMG mike, you sometimes get over 20 MPG (!!) in your big ass truck! congratulations!
i'd rather have any of those 'shitboxes' than your Ram. i bet i could fill up twice (or maybe three times?) with what it costs you to fill up your tank once...
anyway, i call BS on your "I always look at life with everything on a LEVEL PLAYING FIELD" comment. funniest thing i've heard all day, considering your penchant to add comments about how wonderful all your 83,393 American cars are while calling the fit and the versa "shitboxes". Personally I think the interior finish of the Fit is ten times better than your Ram...and funny how the Versa (one of the 'shitboxes', remember?) can be had with a keyless ignition system (intelligent key system) and bluetooth while this isn't even available on your RAM...
it just hurts to see the truth, doesn't it?
Reply
Really Big SUV owner 12:02PM (9/19/2006)
akatsuki,
I have to ask are you really that small minded? Do you really think that GM has not been working on "green technology"? Let's review, all '07 large trucks and SUVs come with displacement on demand. Do you think that this technology was developed in some 6 month time frame? GM was working on the technology before gas prices went north of $2. Now they are about to bring the hybrid version of the Tahoe / Yukon to market. Do you think those are not worthy investments in "Green Technology"? Or least you forget: http://www.autoblog.com/2006/02/02/gm-sheds-more-light-on-full-size-hybrid-suvs/ I will need my fellow autobloggers to show me the post about the Toyota or Nissan full size hybrids.
Reply
Corey W. 11:55AM (9/19/2006)
"...most people, enthusiasts included, would be just fine with a four-cylinder sedan or wagon most of the time. And we'd be better off for it."
You're not an enthusiasts, stop trying to speak for the majority of them.
This article is no different then the rest of the "shock" pieces written to sell news papers. GM and Ford woes are nothing new, where were all these analysis/editorials 5-6 years ago.
Reply
AZMike 12:11PM (9/19/2006)
Rob,
it's interesting that you focus on comparing a little teeny car to a full size pickup. my truck is hauling a trailer weighing over 5,000 pounds all the time (and over 100,000 miles per year); which of these high-mileage tin boxes will do that?
as for interior quality, let's look down the road about five years. if you don't believe me, go look in a wrecking yard. the interior of any domestic car will still be in unfaded, unripped condition; be prepared to find an import interior to be in tatters, and all that "quality plastic" crumbling.
as for the other things you mention, they really aren't of any significance to me. by the way, how does that keyless ignition system work when you find that your keyless entry battery is dead at midnight when you get in your car at the airport? how about when you lose the keyless entry? can I go online and buy a replacement for $30, like I can for a lowly domestic?
technology is not always progress.
Mike
Mike
Reply
Jamie 12:51PM (9/19/2006)
4. hamud,
i smile every time i look at my japanese/american-made acura and driving it to work each day makes my drive a whole lot more pleasant... and by the way, people are obviously not looking for a sporty, fun ride when they buy a prius - they are usually buying it for the perks (carpool lane usage, fuel consumption). people want different things from their cars and that reflects the car market.
and you sincerely don't want a reliable, well made means of transportation? wow.
Posted at 8:50AM on Sep 19th 2006 by Rob 0 stars
-------------------------------------------------------
Do you want our approval? Is it congratulations you want?
Have you ever made an independent dedision to purchase a car based on its looks and merits as opposed to what your neighbors and co-workers think about whatyou drive?
Or what the media tells you will be "best for you"?
I say nope--I'll answer for you.
Only import drivers feel the need to continuously remind others about what kind of cars they drive and "justify" their purchases.
Your cars are no more reliable than others. Please try to contribute something to these boards. Look for validation elsewhere.
Reply
Tri-Bob 1:08PM (9/19/2006)
AZMike (#13), My point was that Chrsler tends to get a free pass (and the key word in your retort is will have...by 2007) Ford and GM already have these vehicles out. People seem to like bashing GM and Ford, Toyota lately for their recalls. People take no responsibility, you want gas prices to come down? Ride your bike, take public transportation, quit waitiing for someone else to design a "perfect" machine, because physics 101 says that it is impossible.
Reply
FourBanger 1:19PM (9/19/2006)
Corey,
"You're not an enthusiasts, stop trying to speak for the majority of them."
I think I am an enthusiast--I don't want to get in a pissing contest here, but whatever. And the only "shock" in these stories is how woefully inadequate GM and Ford's products are--that's the bottom line, at the end of the day. Cobalt vs. Civic. G6 vs. Accord. Fusion Vs. Camry. You're disingenous if you think any of the domestic cars above can lift a finger to anything coming out of Japan these days, even Korea for that matter. I've been coming to this site for awhile, and it's wierd--it didn't strike me as a haven for the USA #1, Calvin-peeing-on-something-sticker crowd.
And Mike, I initially thought you were joking with the wrecking yard comment, but I guess you're serious. First problem is that it's rather difficult to even find an import in a wrecking yard. Second, after driving a mix of several domestic and american cars over the years, I'd put my money on the import interior any day. Although I guess the thick, ugly plastic that cobbles together your Tonka truck's rattling interior might hold up well--I dunno.
Reply
Rob 1:33PM (9/19/2006)
Jamie, I was refuting Hamud's comment above, not trying to get some validation from idiots like you. Believe me, I don't need it, since as I said before, I am plenty satisfied with my car. It doesn't matter that its an Acura or an import, what is important to me is how it drives and THAT is why I purchased it - not based on what the 'media' or my friends told me to. Anyway, if I feel like sharing on here, its also my choice, and while you're free to respond, please don't tell me what to do or where to do it...although I'd like to tell you where to stick it.
Oh, and yeah, I definitely think my car is more reliable than say, a Land Rover, but thats just a minor perk and probably one of the reasons why it has such a great residual value.
Reply