• 43
If you've been holding your breath in anticipation of General Motors redesigning its trucks and SUVs, you're probably going to pass out so start breathing again. According to reports, it's gonna be a while. GM has announced that it's postponed any planned redesigns of its pickups and SUVs to a future date sometime beyond their previously planned 2012 redesigns. What'll it do with the extra time and money? Pouring over its entire product lineup to provide the most fuel efficient vehicles possible to a demanding public. The General announced the move in response to this drastic consumer shift away from trucks and SUVs.

GM isn't the only automaker to make product decisions based on the current vehicle market, as Toyota, Honda, Ford and others have all announced that they are shifting their lineups to include more fuel efficient vehicles. If you haven't noticed, $4-a-gallon gasoline seems to have changed the auto industry in a big way overnight. Thanks for the tip, Mike!

[Source: Yahoo]

I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

    • 1 Second Ago
      • 7 Years Ago
      My comment was directed at Vintage....Seriously, what is it with the comment system?...
      • 7 Years Ago
      Zamafir- "...with GM begging for a federal hand out to design the volt - i wish them well, i really do, I'm just not convinced a car company with barely enough R&D funds to produce their next halo eco car is going to weather this crisis."

      Well hopefully you actually read that release before commenting on it. Here are a few of the salient points of note--the first:
      "The government and auto makers will split the funding. The Department of Energy's intended half would rely on appropriations by Congress."

      This means that the automakers will get $15 million of the $30 million. And there are 3 groups working on separate initiatives within the grant--so let''s say each gets $5 million dollars. Not alot of money when you put it in context.

      GM's part of the grant is to "seek to improve lithium-Ion battery packs and charging systems, integrating its research by 2011 within a test fleet. On its team are the Electric Power Research Institute, the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, and the Michigan Economic Development Corp."

      I'd imagine some of that $5 million will probably be to help pay salaries of those on the team, including those at UMTRI and MEDC. For me, I think one of the key parts of that statement is the "charging systems." As many who went through the EV1 program know, (or perhaps don't) GM ended up floating the bill for a vast majority of the public chargers in CA and AZ. Is it GM's sole responsibility to develop the nationwide charging infrastructure for the Volt and other PHEV's? Hardly. GM and other automakers need some committment from the government to insure this technology is viable for the masses--they cannot do it all alone--develop the battery technology and the car, the charging systems and charging infrastructure all while trying to get a new technology to the masses within a stated deadline of 2010. There has to be a partnership here for the new technology to be mass-deployed--just like the gov't did in the Highway program, to insure there were roads for the masses to drive on to spur the economy and help keep the country safe. The fuel industry gets billions and billions of dollars in subsidies etc., yet with no stipulation to develop alt fuels (as I understand it.) They need to do the same here, if not more. While I applaud the Fed Gov't for it's $30 million, this is peanuts for what the true cost of these new technologies will be, and the Fed needs to step much more up to the plate to insure that the future we on this forum all seek, arrives sooner rather than much, much later. Automakers simply cannot do it all themselves, especially in today's economy.
        • 7 Years Ago
        Ps. thanks for the honest and intelligent reply!
      • 7 Years Ago
      This is great. I'm so glad gas went up. To all the SUV owners:

      Haha! Have fun filling up your poser mobile!
        • 7 Years Ago
        Actually it's a great long distance touring vehicle. That's what it was designed for.
        • 7 Years Ago

        "The SVX was Subaru's attempt to enter the once-popular luxury/performance car category."

        No mention of a touring vehicle.

        "On the downside...because of its rarity, parts are relatively expensive. And every car has its own set of predictable problems. The SVX has three main faults: transmission failure, wheel bearing failure, and warped rotors. The rotor problems are caused by the sheer weight of the SVX--3,600 pounds. Subaru had never made such a heavy car and did not equip them with rotors to match. The transmission and wheel bearings fail prematurely but corrections can be made to extend their life."

        3600 pounds and you pick on the H3? LOL.

        Love you, write back soon.
        • 7 Years Ago
        Now your changing your tune. You didnt say anything about dealers and manufacturers, you specifically insulted ALL SUV owners regarding filling up their tank, nothing more. Of course, this is typical of your posts here, says something stupid, get "low ranked" then try and about face. Allow me to quote in case your scroll button is broken:

        "This is great. I'm so glad gas went up. To all the SUV owners:
        Haha! Have fun filling up your poser mobile!"

        • 7 Years Ago
        Oh yeah, the SVX was a luxury tourer. When I think luxury tourer, I think of windows that don't even go down fully.

        The SVX was supposed to be their sports car. It was only mildly successful. Personally, I thought the XT gave them more cred in the sports car market than the SVX ever managed.
          • 7 Years Ago
          Yeah dude, make fun of it's windows, which do, in fact, roll down all the way. I guess you must hate the Delorean, countach, McLaren F1, and all sorts of other cars with split windows too eh?
        • 7 Years Ago
        70-80 bucks a fill up? Ain't no big deal.
        • 7 Years Ago

        Yep. That's right. You read a website and now know more than me. What do I know? I've only owned one for a long time and have a lot of friends with them. Since you read a website you know what you're talking about! >rolls eyes<

        • 7 Years Ago
        No problem here. 70-80 bucks a pop ain't no thing. Even my silly Honda Civic costs 50 bucks to fill up. Sad thing is that your partially right, some posers are left who had to keep up with the Jones, but most who bought 50k+ SUV's are not bothered by a measly one dollar increase in gas. Sorry dude. Too bad you don't focus your same efforts on the people who are ona budget, driving fuel efficent cars and are seriously strapped by it. Of course, laughing at people who are unaffected must make you feel like you have my Hummer sized penis.
        • 7 Years Ago
        Uh huh. Yep. No big deal at all. Resale values of SUVs and trucks are dropping like anvils, car dealers can't get rid of them, nobody wants to buy them, Ford is restructuring all it's plants to make cars, and GM is postponing any redesigns.

        Yep. No problem at all.
      • 7 Years Ago
      "What'll it do with the extra time and money? Pouring over its entire product lineup to provide the most fuel efficient vehicles possible to a demanding public."

      All right, then, I want a mild-hybrid Colorado. If you're not going to completely redesign the thing, at least make it fuel-efficient enough to justify me buying it over a Tacoma.

      Or at least give it a 6-speed automatic. Geez.
        • 7 Years Ago
        I'd settle for a little broader gear spread on the manual trans. Perhaps a 6 speed. oh- and that 2.9 VM diesel
        • 7 Years Ago
        "Considering Toyota's resale, even if the Colorado got 25 mpg it'd still be hard to justify a new one over a Tacoma."

        In my family we drive our trucks and cars till the wheels fall off.

        So, not an issue. The thing just needs to get me through $6.00 a gallon gas, if not much worse.
        • 7 Years Ago
        I'd like to see that.
        • 7 Years Ago
        Considering Toyota's resale, even if the Colorado got 25 mpg it'd still be hard to justify a new one over a Tacoma.

        One thing the Colorado does have going for it is a good 4 cylinder. The 5 cylinder is pretty pathetic compared to the V6 competition, but the 4 cylinder is strongest in class.

        • 7 Years Ago
        GM: No, we are not going to give you a 6 speed automatic or variable intake valve timing, we are going to give you a V8.

      • 7 Years Ago
      The current Suburban/Tahoe is beautiful. Leave it as-is for as long as you want, guys.
      • 7 Years Ago
      Good move by the General.

      Now, there's still a few more problems to iron out before next year.

      First, you have got to dump the rest of GMAC/ResCap a.s.a.p.

      So, you're mulling over dumping HUMMER also, huh? Good. Do it now. There are too many SUVs in GMs line-up anyway.

      Next merging GMC with Chevrolet trucks is long overdue and will help stop the unnecessary redundancy and bleeding of developmental funds. But to do that you will have to consolidate all of GM into a SINGLE unit: CADILLAC-BUICK-PONTIAC-CHEVROLET. Production at 12 assembly plants will likely cap at about 4 million units. That means reducing the GM dealerships to about 4000.

      CADILLAC: RWD luxury cars, plus Camaro & Corvette
      BUICK: AWD luxury cars based on Chevrolet, turbo optional
      PONTIAC: FWD sporty turbocharged cars based on Chevrolet
      CHEVROLET: FWD mainstream cars and CUVs; plus RWD SUVs, vans, and trucks

      Saturn should be repositioned as a subsidiary of Chevrolet producing just the Chevy Volt. It would be nice if Saturn could add the Toyota Prius as well from the NUMMI venture.

      Saab could still invigorate Buick if it hung around, but a sale here might be worth investigating also. Saab really needs to expand its line-up to include coupes, convertibles, sedans, hatchbacks and wagons.

      Opel, Vauxhall, Holden and Daewoo should all manufacture and sell Chevrolet based cars. That eliminates a lot of overlap and redundancy worldwide.

      Dang, y'all gotta cut all those unneeded expenses to the bone to survive in next year's frigid economy. With the truck market sliding faster downhill than a snowball in hell and GMs penchant for slow reaction to obvious shortcomings, drastic measures are necessary immediately!
        • 7 Years Ago
        GM is better of killing GMC and Pontiac. There is no point in rebadging chevy trucks as GMCs nor does it make any sense to sell mediocre cars badged as Pontiacs.
        Sell Saab too, GM doesn't need it , it already has Saturn and money saved in the long run on Saab could be used for the Saturn division.
        My suggestion would be to keep Buick and expand its line up sharing components from Cadillac and Chevy and make it GMs Lexus.(Smooth, quiet and high quality, unlike Cadillac which should remain sporty and fun to drive.)
        • 7 Years Ago
        AWD Buicks in a time of expensive gas. Paying the 1-2mpg penalty for AWD in those cars makes no sense.

        And didn't you ever read Lutz' layout of the brands? It makes a lot of sense. More sense than your layout. I'm sure you can find it on autoblog search for "Cadillac competes with BMW" or "Buick competes with Lexus".
      • 7 Years Ago
      All we are doing is maving back to the pre-SUV boom days. Think about the SUVs that were out in the 80's. Suburban, Bronco, 4Runner, Discovery; they rerely saw any mojoy changes. Sure they all took on some cosmetic changes, but those are minor facelifts to keep it fresh. The people buying them were off-road enthusiasts, or rachers... people who needed the atributes for their work/hobby. You didn't drive your Suburban to the supermarket, it was being used to haul the trailer and your Bronco had a 5" lift and 32" tires that made packing groceries in it a complete nightmare.

      The SUV will not die. It'll just fall back into the market from where it came. Its advances and changes will come as needed not as demanded.
        • 7 Years Ago
        very true, it's just GM's press releases make it seem as though doomsday is neigh simply because they've not realigned production before the issue vs knee jerk after... but you're totally correct.
      • 7 Years Ago
      Luckiuly they just redesigned their full size trucks and SUV's, so for Chevy a 4 year wait is no biggie, the truck changes over the last 20+ years have always been slow and subtle.
        • 7 Years Ago
        • 7 Years Ago
        Sure but the real question is, if they're just now switching tons of effort towards good fuel economy, why have all those minor improvements consumed so much of their R&D until now? Why hasn't GM made improving fuel efficiency in their cars an parallel priority to a slightly different front end on their trucks. I'm glad they're finally reacting, even if it is knee jerk, I'm just struggling to find the rational for not having "Pouring over its entire product lineup to provide the most fuel efficient vehicles possible to a demanding public." the last eight years? What would it have hurt to have made that their top priority say in 2000? why would an automaker wait until gas eclipsed $4/gal and lay off tens of thousands of workers vs constantly make fuel efficiency a priority. Lutz was around in the 80s. It boggles.

        Any who, this is actually a pretty bad sign, coupled with GM begging for a federal hand out to design the volt - i wish them well, i really do, I'm just not convinced a car company with barely enough R&D funds to produce their next halo eco car is going to weather this crisis.
      • 7 Years Ago
      "...If you haven't noticed, $4-a-gallon gasoline seems to have changed the auto industry in a big way overnight."

      Wait until this time next year when its $6.50+ a gallon!

      Press release June 2009
      "...in an unprecedented unified moved, every auto maker world wide has announced the end of all production V8 gasoline engines, effective in the 2010 model year...."
        • 7 Years Ago
        Actually as more people awaken to the reality of todays energy situation they'll slowly come to the realization that's it's not just about money, it's about being responsible with a finite natural resource that is required for many things in our life yet pollutes the world at the same time.

        Just because you can financially afford to be wasteful doesn't mean it's right or that you should.
        • 7 Years Ago
        sorry buddy - that won't happen. i drive a V10 (Audi S8) and i couldn't give a toss how high gas goes - it's a difference of a couple hundred bucks for me at year's end... there will always be demand for big V8s, V10s, V12s, W16s, etc. just not as much as before. either way, it doesn't matter because cars with those kinds of engines are directed at people who see gas price as a negligible part of their budgets...
      • 7 Years Ago
      The funny thing is that there will always be a need for large trucks and SUV's (contractors, something to haul the boat/trailer/etc.). A knee-jerk reaction of postponing the redesign just means that when these people are shopping, they will likely buy something that is more modern and more fuel efficient.

      I feel GM would be better off reducing the numerous rebadges and offer a redesign in one flavor. For example, the full-size truck would only be offered by GMC or Chevy, not by both. Same goes for the small trucks and large SUVs. At the very least, offer a competitive product in the market (even when that market is currently shrinking), just not as many.
      • 7 Years Ago
      Sir I am sure you are wealthy enough to drive your S8 at any cost. Unfortunately GM, Ford, VW, etc. are not wealthy enough to make cars that 99.99999999% of people won't buy because they can't afford to put gas in it.

      ...besides, Audi is switching over to all TDI, in every car, no gas engines at all, aren't they? They sell diesel made out of cotton seed oil here in Texas. It's like 2 bucks a gallon.
        • 7 Years Ago
        i was merely pointing out to the poster that V8's and bigger engines will not be disappearing anytime soon. There has never been a huge demand for V8s/larger engines - they've mostly been purchased by people who don't care much about the price of gas (with the glaring exception being the V8 SUVs that have been all the rage in recent times). traditionally, only wealthy people could afford V8's, V10's etc. and it will continue to be the case no matter what the price of gas is.

        And I have not heard anyhting about Audi making every single model a diesel - i definitely think you are wrong about that...
        • 7 Years Ago
        Willie Nelson's cotton seed bio diesel stations are here:

    • Load More Comments