By on November 26, 2018

Image: General Motors

Heavy-duty streamlining has reached the production level at General Motors. After last night’s bombshell (though not unexpected) report claiming Canada’s oldest auto plant would cease operations late next year, more news is trickling out about the automaker’s production future.

Add Ohio and Michigan to the list of locales expected to lose an assembly plant.

According to Nick Bunkley of Automotive News, Detroit-Hamtramck and Lordstown Assembly, makers of GM’s full-size front-wheel drive products and the Chevrolet Cruze, will join Oshawa Assembly in closing its doors. Both American plants now operate on one shift, with no shortage of downtime last year to curtail ballooning inventory.

Oshawa, of course, builds the marked-for-death Cadillac XTS and Chevrolet Impala, which also sees assembly in Hamtramck. Shift workers walked off the job this morning at the Ontario plant, which, like its American counterparts, possessed an increasingly hazy future. Roughly 2,500 unionized workers and 300 salaried employees call the plant home.

Unifor, the union representing Detroit Three autoworkers in Canada, stated Sunday night that there was no product allocated to Oshawa after December 2019.

2018 Chevrolet Impala, Image: General Motors

“Based on commitments made during 2016 contract negotiations, Unifor does not accept this announcement and is immediately calling on GM to live up to the spirit of that agreement,” the union said in a media release. “Unifor is scheduled to hold a discussion with General Motors tomorrow and will provide further comment following the meeting.”

Meanwhile, Reuters reports that discussions that took place between GM and the UAW last year will surely ramp up again. Those talks concerned falling sedan sales and what to do with underutilized plants like Hamtramck and Lordstown. Now, the context is clearer. With GM offering buyouts to 50,000 salaried workers across the globe and angling for a heavily electrified product lineup in the not-so-distant future, the dinosaurs must die. Sales of the Impala, XTS, CT6, and Buick LaCrosse are, like the Cruze, down significantly in 2018. However, Hamtramck also builds the electrified Chevy Volt.

Image: GM

Update: GM CEO Mary Barra, speaking at a media conference this morning, has confirmed that the three aforementioned plants, as well as Warren Transmission and the company’s Baltimore operations, will cease to exist by the end of next year. She also confirmed that the shuttering of the plants, expected to save the company $6 billion in 2020, spells the discontinuation of the products built at those plants.

According to The Detroit News, this means the loss of 3,300 U.S. jobs. UAW contracts are up for renegotiation next year.

[Images: General Motors]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

171 Comments on “GM to Shed Five North American Plants, Numerous Products, Amid Restructuring Drive...”


  • avatar
    NoID

    Ford and GM have each announced significant buy-outs, closures, etc. I wonder if anything’s on the chopping block at FCA.

    Also, I was under the impression that GM’s Baltimore operation had been defunct for quite some time now, since the demise of the Astro and Safari vans. Did I miss something?

  • avatar
    Lie2me

    You heard it here first (yesterday) thanks to Mikey

  • avatar
    Arthur Dailey

    We are witnessing what might be the start of the total restructuring of the auto industry.

    The end of sedans, for one? The trend towards mainstream production of hybrids/electrics for another?

    And despite the rhetoric, no ‘America first’. Both Canada and the USA are losing good jobs in this restructuring. No mention of the downsizing of workforces in Mexico or Asia?

    • 0 avatar
      NoID

      Absolutely. The fascination with cars is fading, the industry is pivoting back to where it began with tall (or tall-ish) vehicles with more all-around utility. Don’t blame the millennial bogey-persons, look at a Model T and I’ll show you yesteryear’s CUV.

      As for production locations, I continue to be disappointed by the race overseas but on paper it makes sense. With the rising costs of fuel (current dip notwithstanding) and the looming trade war it makes sense to build in the market you’ll be selling. Cars aren’t selling here, so moving production elsewhere makes sense. The Baltimore operation shutting down doesn’t make as much sense to me, unless they’re relocating production closer to the truck assembly plants. Who knows, maybe Flint will benefit…

      • 0 avatar

        It is fascination to watch GM not learn from history and repeat the same mistakes over again. It was just a decade ago GM went bankrupt for essentially concentrating too much on SUVs and trucks. As for autonomous cars and mobility they are just the latest novelty that will eventually fade into the history books.

        It won’t be long now until Toyota surpasses GM in US sales. GM has shown the seeds of its destruction today.

      • 0 avatar
        d4rksabre

        “Don’t blame the millennial bogey-persons, look at a Model T and I’ll show you yesteryear’s CUV.”

        Hmmm…I like that. I’m going to have to ponder it a bit.

        • 0 avatar
          d4rksabre

          I wonder if there’s a modern comparable. What’s the modern Model T? James May might tell you it’s the Dacia Sandero…

          It’s probably the CR-V though. Ugh.

          • 0 avatar
            bumpy ii

            The Model T was as much a tractor as it was a car. Modern-day equivalent is that Mahindra we-swear-its-not-a-Jeep ATV.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Like Jello, there’s always room to blame the millennial bogey-persons.

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      GM already announced the closing of its Gunsun plant in SK months ago and wouldn’t be surprised if they pull out entirely from Korea in the future.

      As for Mexico, the cost of labor there is significantly less and Mexico has FTA’s w/ many more countries than what the US has, so Mexico (esp. for lower price vehicles) is seen as a much better export hub.

      Even the Germans use Mexico as an export hub for their lower priced models.

  • avatar
    mikey

    I was planning to drive over to the union hall, to get a read on the work stoppage . My Mustang is in the body shop to fix a dent and I’m driving a Nissan Maxima as a rental ..?? I think I best wait for my Buddy to pick me up with his Silverado

  • avatar
    Speed3

    As Mary Barra continues to break up and divest GM divisions, she should really spin off Buick and Cadillac while the economy is still decent and a buyer could be found. I am sure a Chinese company would love to scoop up Buick. Its been clear for decades that GM does not have the skill set to make Cadillac the luxury brand the world deserves. Tata has done will with JLR, let somebody else see what they can do with Cadillac.

    I wonder how much longer the Malibu will be around (a little surprised the Cruz got cut before the Malibu).

    • 0 avatar

      The US auto industry sucks. That is all that needs to be said. The Chinese are not going to be interested in GM pickup trucks.

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        The basic GM structure and past union agreements were what caused the downfall and death of GM in 2008. Ms Barra is trying to make GM relevant again by re-arranging the deck chairs on this, today’s Titanic that is GM. Many icebergs ahead for GM that died in 2008 and should have stayed dead.

        Back in 2009 there were several of ttac’s B&B who did not buy into the wisdom of bailing out and nationalizing GM to keep it on life support, but only time will tell WHEN we’ll start a brand new GM deathwatch.

        Arthur Dailey is right. This is the end of the beginning of the global auto industry’s shake out, and within a few years we’ll see iconic GM nameplates like Chevrolet, Silverado, Cadillac and Buick being owned by an Asian automaker.

        Hey, Chrysler already is foreign owned.

        • 0 avatar
          bd2

          Actually, it was the financial crisis/Great Recession brought upon by Wall St. and the large mortgage lenders (like CountryWide) which ultimately brought GM and Chrysler to their knees (which was enabled by the legislation pushed by former Republican Senator Phil Gramm).

          Ford was just lucky enough to max out their credit line before the lending markets froze and even then they came perilously close to bankruptcy (Cash 4 Clunkers and other govt. programs basically saved them).

          Also, activist investors had previously forced GM to do 2 share buy-backs which ended up costing GM billions in cash reserves ($$ they could have used to ride out the economy).

          That being said, GM (along w/ Chrysler and Ford) were poorly managed for decades.

          And the UAW had been living beyond their means, but GM’s bankruptcy forced the UAW to make deep concessions.

          Concessions which enabled GM to build the SUB-compact Sonic here in the US when most other auto-makers don’t even build their compact cars in the US anymore.

      • 0 avatar
        Speed3

        You are right, the Chinese are not interested in GM pickup trucks, but that is not what Buick makes at all. In fact Buick is mostly a Chinese company already and the US sales arm is an after thought. GM really doesn’t need Buick in its line up – do we really need a Chevy/GMC/Buick/Cadillac version of the same crossover?

        If GM could have foreseen the financial crash, they would have sold off Hummer and Saab. A recession is probably not too far out in the distance, better raise cash and sell off Buick.

    • 0 avatar
      raynla

      The Malibu is gone too!

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      Actually, JLR is hurting right now b/c Jaguar (even w/ the addition of crossovers) has continued to be a ball and chain.

  • avatar

    The Lacrosse and Impala are among GMs highest rated vehicles. Does that mean the appalling blazer and Sierra pickups are going to survive instead. They sell well, but they have awful interior quality. IF GM is going to concentrate on trucks and SUVs do it well!!!

    Even GM fans hate GM truck interiors. Read the article below.

    http://gmauthority.com/blog/2018/01/2019-silverado-what-we-dislike-about-chevrolets-full-size-pickup/

    • 0 avatar
      Speed3

      Same GM same story. Mediocre at best. Would it kill GM to be actually make the best vehicle on the market?

    • 0 avatar
      crazyforwheels

      I have had a 2014 impala, a 2016 impala and since last spring a 2018 Cadillac XTS. All the cars were made at the Oshawa plant, and all three were faulty free cars.

      All had the 3.6l v6 which is a very efficient engine. I got excellent gas mileage fron these large cars and nice ride comfort.

      I guess my relationship with GM is over, they won’t have a nice luxury car so I’ll have to go elsewhere. GM will say that the customer abandon them.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    So is the Lacrosse being kept or not? I know they’ve shown a 2020 refresh for the Lacrosse but I guess it could be a “China Only” proposition.

    Ironically killing off the Impala and XTS would increase my likely hood of snagging one in the spirit of “GM got it right and then killed it.”

    • 0 avatar

      Consumer Reports rated the Impala as the best in its class. It was the only GM vehicle to receive that honor. In the GM universe the best vehicles don’t always survive.

      • 0 avatar
        SCE to AUX

        The Impala also suffers from incredible depreciation – one of the worst around.

        • 0 avatar
          PrincipalDan

          @SCE which makes a CPO Impala a good value.

          Models optioned up to Premiere trim with low miles also have a low-low price. Same with XTS.

          • 0 avatar
            jkross22

            Dan, spot on. These are the proverbial little ‘ol lady cars if bought smart. Buying used is the way to go. Dealers can’t account for the depreciation beat down these take.

          • 0 avatar
            PrincipalDan

            @jkross22, one of the ways my local Buick/GMC dealer has been compensating for the loss of Pontiac is jamming the used lot with CPO Chevrolet sedans.

            Honestly I could probably give them an order (go find X with Y options and give me a call.)

          • 0 avatar
            SCE to AUX

            No doubt. Most of the time, I end up buying cars that depreciate a lot, or already have.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      Well, the “sources” on this are reporting the XTS, CT6, Lacrosse, Impala, Cruze, and Volt will all be discontinued in the US as a result of this plan.

      The Cruze can still be imported from Mexico, but it might be curtains for the others.

      • 0 avatar
        Whatnext

        They’re going to invest in the future of electric transportation by killing the Volt? Sounds like typical GM “excellence”!

        • 0 avatar
          Syke

          From what I’m reading, they talking about closing the plants, not specifically killing off certain lines of vehicles. No doubt, a lot of the model mentioned (the majority?) will probably be dropped, but I see the Cruze and Volt being moved somewhere else.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            Jalopnik got a direct message from GM about the Volt being discontinued in 2019.

            jalopnik.com/general-motors-may-kill-the-chevrolet-volt-1830653844

          • 0 avatar
            Syke

            Yeah, I’ve been reading some later articles and both the Volt and Cruze are going. Looks like, contrary to earlier statements, GM is going to follow the Ford model: If it ain’t a truck or something you’ll see at Cars and Coffee, buy elsewhere.

        • 0 avatar
          raynla

          The Volt is a hybrid!

  • avatar
    Asdf

    Christmas time came early for Big Al from Oz. I’m sure he’ll celebrate the loss of American jobs, as this is something that REALLY makes him happy.

  • avatar
    mikey

    akear …wants to turn this into a GM bash ?? Knock your self out . I’ve heard it all before . I’m outta here .

  • avatar
    toxicroach

    Where’s that guy from the Oshawa thread trumpeting how Trump was bringing the jobs back to the US?

    • 0 avatar
      NoID

      Maybe instead of fuel economy we should be regulating ride height and drag coefficient.

      • 0 avatar
        toxicroach

        Was that supposed to be a response to me? If so, I do not understand it.

        • 0 avatar
          JohnTaurus

          Yeah, you tried to start a political rant war and he didnt play along. So sad (for you).

          Instead, he had an equally terrible idea to start a rant about the government regulating vehicles he doesn’t like out of existence. Force others to buy only what he finds acceptable. Yeah, that doesn’t sound like absolute hell at all!

          • 0 avatar
            NoID

            I think you’re both being a little short sighted. My comment was simply that if Trump wants to force the OEMs to build inside the US, and if many of GM’s plants are tailored to car production, maybe instead of tariffs and fuel economy he should push legislation that would force OEMs to build cars instead of CUVs.

            It was snark more than anything.

            And who’s to say I don’t like CUVs? My tastes are quite eclectic. I daily drive a 90’s midsizer, my wife daily drives a Mazda5, we have a full size van to fit the entire family / act as the pickup truck when we need it, and my next lease/purchase is very likely to be a Renegade or Compass. In the past our garage has included two flavors of small car (one sedan, one coupe) and two different minivans.

            I drive what I need.

          • 0 avatar
            toxicroach

            Wasn’t trying to start a rant war. Just pointing out how dumb that guy is.

          • 0 avatar
            JohnTaurus

            It still doesn’t make sense, forcing them to build unprofitable vehicles will be good for the economy? I guess if you just want to bash Trump, it works. And, I may be short-sighted, but it sure seemed as though your little plan would target large trucks and utilities, not little CUVs.

          • 0 avatar
            NoID

            JohnTaurus that’s the beauty of regulations, they don’t have to make sense! Carve out a no-fly-zone somewhere between cars and trucks.

            Isn’t that what the government does, pick winners and losers? This would force cars back into profitability, because the real issue with cars is that the sales volume being low is killing profitability.

            Also, because apparently I need to include this…

            [/sarc]

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            NoID, I doubt President Trump will accomplish very much during the next two years. His greatest accomplishments were in the two years following his election.

            But he can be effective with things like stacking the courts with extreme right judges, appointing another Justice to the US Supreme Court when an opening happens, etc.

            All he needs for that is a simple majority in the US Senate. And he’s got that.

            I’m grateful the Trump presidency happened in the last years of my life, because I am enjoying the best years of my life under this current regime.

            Really! The boom is on for many retirees and annuitants who had only doom and gloom to look forward to during the last administration.

            Financially free at last! Financially free at last! Gawd almighty, we’re financially free at last!

    • 0 avatar
      WalterRohrl

      Ha, yeah that was HighDesertCat, the guy that brags about paying illegal immigrants under the table, doing “consulting” work himself similarly getting paid by another US tax evader under the table without declaring any of that income, but continuously touts his “I was in the Air Force” card and presumably still gets government benefits from that while admitting far and wide in public that he cheats said same government.

      He’ll show up here soon and spin his previous embarrassingly incorrect comment from just yesterday into a completely different “The US got exactly what it voted for, they always do, hardy har har…”, never mind that the US populace didn’t actually vote in any kind of actual majority for what it got. Whatever.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      I certainly am no fan of Trump, but blaming him for a change in market conditions makes about zero sense.

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        But WalterRohrl is WalterRohrl. He is entitled to his opinions.

      • 0 avatar
        formula m

        I recall Donald meeting with top auto executives and told everyone he didn’t like them. Then gave Sergio the kiss of death… “Right now, he (Marchionne) is my favorite person in the room.”

        https://www.google.ca/amp/s/jalopnik.com/trump-on-sergio-marchionne-he-is-my-favorite-1825958140/amp

    • 0 avatar
      Pete Zaitcev

      Well, he is. It’s just that GM is a company that can fail even in the up market.

  • avatar
    jf1979

    The closure of Detroit-Hamtramck aka “Poletown” seems especially like a slap in the face, considering the negative effects on property rights that came out of the legal fights to build the plant.

    • 0 avatar
      Asdf

      Tesla is no ray of hope in the US auto industry. On the contrary, Tesla has proven to be chronically incompetent, unable to build competitive cars, and with its pathetic lineup being defective by design, especially with every single one of its BEVs having an extremely slow charging time that exceeds the reasonable industry standard of 5 minutes long since established by ICE-powered cars.

      Make no mistake about it, for its incompetence Tesla will be rewarded with bankruptcy, and in this case it will be VERY well deserved.

      • 0 avatar

        The world loves tesla and thinks GM and Ford cars are rubbish. If it weren’t for Tesla America would have less automotive prowess than the French. Do you know that PSA has already turned Opel around.

        GM sucks donkey balls. They really do….

    • 0 avatar
      sgeffe

      I was growing up in Detroit during that time.

      BIG controversy! State of the art plant at the time, now just another blight on the Detroit landscape!

  • avatar

    All can say today is thank goodness the US industry has Tesla. As I said before Tesla and Cadillac are the only ray of hope in the chaotic US auto industry.

    I find it truly bizarre that fine cars like the Lacrosse and XTS get cancelled, while a cheaply built piece of trash like the Sierra survives.

    • 0 avatar
      jkross22

      Man, you’re really sporting a tent for your Sierra hate today.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      Yes! How crazy and BIZARRE to continue a product that sells well and makes money, while discontinuing products that dont! How stupid! I mean what are they thinking? Profits? That’s just crazy talk!

      Do you enjoy saying the opposite of everything rational and logical? It sure seems like it.

      • 0 avatar

        Bad, and mediocre vehicles do sometimes sell well. GM has made a sport of this. Gm trucks and SUVs have good utility, but their interior aesthetics stink. At least FCA designs its truck interiors with some semblance of taste.

        Alas, we had the highest hopes for some recent GM cars.
        Now they are destined to be replaced by a whole slew of mediocre GM trucks and SUVs. After a brief renaissance, mostly due to some reasonably good cars,, GM finds itself back in the doghouse. This a doghouse of mediocre construction and it won’t last long.

  • avatar
    dwford

    So GM isn’t planning on replaced all of that sales volume? Ford at least made vague promises of a bunch of new SUVs and EV vehicles to replace the cars.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      I dont get this mentality. The sales volume provided by those models has dwindled down to practically nothing, and I’d speculate that if they were losing GM money, they’d rather have no sale than a sale that spills red ink.

      Cue the people who will ignore that and run across the internet finding how many sales they have with those models, as though ANY sale MUST be profitable (when it most certainly is not). “How can they walk away from xx,xxx sales?” Very easily if a healthy majority of those were detrimental to their bottom line.

      • 0 avatar
        dwford

        GM has been on constant retreat for decades. At what point do they reach bottom and decide to grow as a company??

        That said, the 3 Cruzes I bought earlier this year were most definitely not profitable sales for GM.

    • 0 avatar

      Who will get the biggest dunce cap this year Barra or Hackett? The once hapless FCA looks to be the only student getting a passing grade. Is there anything more loathsome in the world than a GM truck?

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    Interesting that the Volt is officially dead. It’s currently #5 in sales for plug in vehicles, but even when Bolt sales are included, Tesla is selling 5x the number of electrified vehicles as GM.

    The only way GM can be serious about EVs will be to produce lots of them, and it will be interesting to see how they can do it profitably. The Volt and Bolt are certainly money losers, but even Tesla has shown how hard it is to build an EV for a profit.

    Also, GM cannot build EVs without plants, and without an enormous battery supply. I can’t see how their new future can succeed.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      Yep, Tesla showed that the main product you must sell is hype, not cars.

    • 0 avatar

      The bolt is GMs worst selling car. They are only selling 11000 a year. GM electric cars will fail. Heck, they have already failed.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        The CT6 is Guangzhou-Guadalajara’s worst selling sedan, just as I predicted.

        It will be lucky to break 800 units moved per month on any sustained basis, just as I predicted at its unveiling (the XTS that they are discontinuing sells 5x the number of vehicles as the “advanced” flagship pile of sh!t CT6 does – and they’re also going to be cutting the CT6, a very newly launched model that they won’t even come close to monetizing the cost of its development on).

        I’m so hard on Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors (GM), right?

        They make overpriced, garbage-grade rolling dumpster fires, and have only survived thus far due to a massive taxpayer bailout + 7 years of the easiest financial conditions (thanks to massively inefficient QE1, QE2, and QE3 by the Fed under Bernanke and Yellen) known to corporations in history (even the worst-run corporations like GM have been dipping their wicks in a literal ocean of freshly printed fiat currency, at historically cheap interest rates, as they finance terrible operations and sell bonds with incredibly low yields and buy massive chunks of their own stock back).

        MARK OF EXCELLENCE.

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          p.s. There are credible stories out that Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors (GM) will be closing 7, not 5, factories/facilities.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            p.s. x2

            Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors (GM):

            1) is going to see its pickup truck duo (Silverado/Sierra) market share decline significantly (new RAM and F Series are going to keep chipping away),

            2) can’t compete in Europe, South or Central America, or even Asia (even Chinese sales are in freefall),

            3) is copying the idiotic Hackett plan, dumping most sedan/coupe production, and will now be exposed tremendously long term compared to Toyota, Honda, Nissan and the Germans, as GM puts almost all eggs in one basket,

            4) doesn’t deserve to live in its current form, under its current totally incompetent leadership.

        • 0 avatar
          bd2

          The CT6 was never meant to be Cadillac’s flagship sedan and like the other Cadillac sedans developed prior to it (the ATS and 3G CTS) was a poorly thought out vehicle.

          That being said, the CT6 still outsells the Lincoln Continental (7,270 to 6,012) when arguably, the XTS (12,665) is more the Conti’s true competitor.

          Doing around 10k in volume is not enough to sustain production when there are really no other markets where the CT6 sells aside from China (which has its own production of the CT6).

          The biggest problem for American lux sedans is that there are no other markets with any materials sales to support continued production here.

          The Germans have the US, the EU, Korea, Japan and the Middle East to support production in Germany.

          Jaguar, otoh, has the same problem as Cadillac and Lincoln (only real market is the EU which isn’t enough).

          • 0 avatar
            Luke42

            Tesla builds an American luxury sedan with worldwide appeal.

            GM does builds the last century’s luxury sedan today, and without any sort of retro-cool.

            Cadillac’s “dare greatly” slogan seemed pretty empty compared to the way Musk bets the company in each new product.

            It is possible to build an American luxury sedan with worldwide appeal by daring greatly and pushing technological limits. It’s just that GM builds conventional cars tarted up like Autobots, while Tesla sells a ticket to the future.

      • 0 avatar

        Bolt is too small for the price. Volt and Leaf still small but acceptable.

    • 0 avatar

      The bolt is GMs worst selling car. They are only selling 11000 a year. GM electric cars will fail. Heck, they have already failed.

    • 0 avatar
      Asdf

      GM would be one step closer to succeeding by abandoning EVs altogether. The short range, long charging times and exorbitant costs have proven that BEVs are an evolutionary dead-end, and there’s no reason to waste more time and resources on them.

    • 0 avatar
      spookiness

      Sadly the Volt probably wouldn’t sell well even it was 10x better than a Tesla, and 50x better than a Prius. The GM stain is forever in the minds of many people. Biggest problem now is its a sedan. It’s a shame, since Tesla could certainly learn a thing or two from GM about build quality. I see so many misaligned body panels on Tesla. It’s often glaring and unmissable.

    • 0 avatar
      Syke

      I’m not certain that the Volt is dead. The plant is history, no doubt the majority of the cars made in them will not be transferred elsewhere, but I find it hard to believe that the Cruze (if you’re going to stay at least somewhat in the sedan market, you at least need a ‘C’ class sedan), and the Volt (political considerations here) won’t be moved elsewhere.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    This is why niche cars have little hope of ever being produced. Internet commenters have no idea how much resource goes into building and selling a car.

    BTW, this should give PSA pause about their foolish idea to bring Peugeot back to the US.

    Also, I wouldn’t be surprised if FCA withdraws Fiat from the US soon.

    Meanwhile, Tesla can’t build cars fast enough.

  • avatar
    Paul Alexander

    It’s going to be a beautiful moment when our transgender president xxxSyclonExxx hands over control of the autonomous transportation grid to the Chinese in 2024. I’m sure the Asians will be as nice to us as we have been to them.

    We are so fucked, the US has been completely sold out and the new owners have begun the restructuring process. There’s a couple of real accelerators looming on the horizon as well, including Boomers’ pensions. I’m moving out of the country while it’s still possible, probably New Mexico (not a real fan of the old one).

  • avatar
    scott25

    The Volt’ll be back, as a pure EV. They have to monetize that Bolt platform somehow, since they seem to be completely unwilling to make electric subcompact and compact crossovers which is the obvious solution .

    The Cruze will probably limp on for a few more years imported from elsewhere, since unlike the Focus it’s still relatively class-competitive and good at getting customers into the GM system. There needs to be something between the Spark and Trax price-wise.

    So has the discontinuation of the Sonic ever been officially announced? And the Spark limps on for a few more years. It’ll look even more like a pimple on dealer lots.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      A better-looking Bolt would be welcome. Its 60 kWh drivetrain is very nice, often delivering more range than its EPA claim.

      I thought the 2nd incarnation of the Volt was a real looker, but it was tiny inside. Maybe GM can somehow blend the two vehicles.

  • avatar
    vehic1

    asdf: Yep, who the Hail needs electricity at all? Burn coal or oil for heat and light, and transport – we’re ready for the 19th Century, right NOW! The more fumes, the better!

    • 0 avatar
      Whatnext

      asdf can’t hear you, he’s waiting for his coal-powered Hupmobile outside.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      Electric cars are also 19th Century technology.

      “In 1884, over 20 years before the Ford Model T, Thomas Parker built the first practical production electric car in London using his own specially designed high-capacity rechargeable batteries.[20][21][22] The Flocken Elektrowagen of 1888 was designed by German inventor Andreas Flocken.[23] Electric cars were among the preferred methods for automobile propulsion in the late 19th century and early 20th century, providing a level of comfort and ease of operation that could not be achieved by the gasoline cars of the time.[24] The electric vehicle stock peaked at approximately 30,000 vehicles at the turn of the 20th century.”

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car

  • avatar
    ajla

    Just to follow-up. Right now GM is saying that everything involved is being discontinued.

    -Cruze, Lacrosse, and Volt gone in March 2019.
    -Impala and XTS gone in Q4 2019.
    -CT6 gone in mid 2019.

    Obviously they can change their minds, but this is shaping up to be GM’s carpocalypse. Especially knowing the Regal and Sonic are on borrowed time as well.

    caranddriver.com/news/gm-plant-closing-production-cars

    • 0 avatar
      JMII

      So like Ford if its not a truck or SUV there is no reason to keep making it.

      • 0 avatar

        Ford trucks are no where near as bad as their GM counterparts. That Blazer I sat in a few months ago was just about the biggest piece of junk I ever seen.

        GM without cars is a pretty pathetic company.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          I agree. Ford trucks are better than any of GMs, any day. Were I to buy another pickup truck, an F250 would be my choice over a GM2500.

          Half-ton pickups, I would choose another Tundra 5.7 as #1, and a RAM 5.7 as #2 because of the luxurious interiors and ride.

          I would rate a Titan 5.6 ahead of any 5.3L GM half-ton pickup trucks because of that 5.6L V8 and the better interior. Grunty!

          Still, GM diehards will always buy GM. Sad part is, there aren’t enough of them on the planet to make GM profitable.

          Maybe a restructuring will.

      • 0 avatar
        Pete Zaitcev

        The only difference is, Ford’s management was explicit about the no-sedan future, and GM sneaked it in as a part of plant closure. But the result is exactly the same at both companies.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      Fire sale.

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        I’m hoping for good deals on some of those discontinued models. I’ll start my shopping for my next ride in the summer of 2019.

        Although right now my local Buick dealer isn’t ordering Lacrosses at all. Finally sold their last 2017 about a month ago and only ordered ONE 2018 during the entire model year.

  • avatar
    schmitt trigger

    Regardless of your particular feelings about GM……

    To remember the classic Charles E Wilson quote:
    What is good for our country is good for General Motors, and vice versa.**, the slow decline of what was the world’s largest automaker for close to a century, it is a sad event..

    **Disclaimer: the exact actual wording may be different.

    • 0 avatar

      That statement was made when GM was the world’s largest car company. Now they are in fourth place just behind Nissan. GM has become an automotive niche player. They are already irrelevant Europe, which is the world’s toughest market to compete in.

      GM and Ford are a disgrace. They had a better lineup in 2008 during the great recession.

    • 0 avatar
      Guitar man

      Once Mary ran out of foreign plants to close she was always going to start on North America. She’s a one trick pony, and the share traders love her.

  • avatar

    Since GM is back to building rubbish trucks with bad interiors it is time to again to read this famous TTAC editorial about GM’s rubbish interiors.

    https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009/03/inside-gm-mystery-of-crap-interiors-solved/

    • 0 avatar
      JMII

      My father has an older Trail Blazer and that interior is pretty much my go-to example of what a bad GM interior is like. In addition to being ugly and clearly cheap, the door panels have faded to a point where they are completely white.

      Now my C7 has a fantastic interior… so it appears someone at GM heard all the screaming about how bad the ‘Vette was. Now I just have to hope the leather dash doesn’t peel or bubble like some have reported (I use a sun shade to protect it). My only two complaints with the interior are 1) the carpet is incredibly thin and 2) the underside of the rear hatch is painted in what must be the weakest paint ever – I accidentally removed some of it while cleaning the other day with a degreaser (I had gotten some grease on it while lubing the latch). It has a one rattle I haven’t been able to fully track now but its way better then my Nissan which rattled and squeaked like crazy on the inside.

  • avatar
    threeer

    Never mind that my family will have two dead vehicles (mom has a one and done run Verano and I own (for a while until I dump it) a 17 Cruze). The Cruze is utter crap (not that it was built in the USA, but still). I mostly feel for the thousands that are entering this holiday season unsure of where they will be working in the very near future). First Ford with their recoil from anything not spelled C-U-V or S-U-V and now this. “Big Three,” indeed…

  • avatar
    Matt51

    Barra is clueless. In 1979, GM employed 680,000 Americans. Now, we will end up with ~70,000? 90% of GM jobs are gone, the nation won’t miss the final 10%. Nobody gives a rat*uck now if GM goes out of business, except maybe the dealers. GM arrogance – the jobs have been lost – no one cares anymore when they disappear. Continuously build second class vehicles and what do you expect? Another taxpayer bailout? It won’t happen.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    The inevitable is occurring at GM. As much as job losses are hard, what is harder would be the complete collapse of GM by maintaining the status quo.

    The US business model does need changing in many factories to remain competitive.

    US vehicle regulations, import tariffs, etc impede the growth of a competitive industry. The US government needs to step up and start restructuring these to force the industry to look for better ways to be competitive.

    I hope GM can make the necessary changes, with changes made by government to make for a stronger US vehicle industry.

    This did not occur because of external pressure. It occurred due to failure of unions, industry and government.

    • 0 avatar
      NutellaBC

      You are not making sense. The US market is the most competitive in the world, with more safety regulations to protect users and consumers, and less barriers than any Asian or European markets. The US market has safer cars sold for less money than any other country, the most demanding consumers and the most difficult operating conditions ( high miles, high temp and altitude variations) and US manufacturers don’t have any captive markets to overcharge customers like Japan or Germany.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Nutella,
        The US is not the most competitive. Way too much Koolaid.

        • 0 avatar
          NutellaBC

          Of course it is. And I am saying this as an European who worked in both EU and US markets. I even forgot to includes stricter emissions standards with much longer warranties and litigation costs.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            Nutella,
            The Aussie market, the New Zealand markets are more competitive.

            To say the US has the most stringent safety and emission standards, then state its the most competitive doesn’t gell.

            Cheapest doesn’t make for most competitive.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    All the people who have posted for years on how they won’t buy a GM sedan for [fill in the reason here] are now wondering why GM is killing most of their sedans.

    The combined sales for the first 9 months of 2018 of the killed US models? 190K units – less than half of Silverado sales.

    Old GM would have kept building these models and slapped thousands of dollars on the hood at 0% financing and sold them to every rental agency who wanted them – losing money on each one sold.

    New GM is killing unprofitable operations. Global platforms for countries like China keep small engines and economy platforms alive and ready to slide into the US market if oil prices suddenly go to $140 a barrel and hold there for an extended period of time.

    Oh, and since the United States has been the largest producer of crude oil in the world off and on since 2011, and low oil prices are now bad for the US economy – prices won’t be going to $140 a barrel as the industry has a very vested interest to keep prices between $55 and $85 a barrel now, and the US has a lot more control over the market to make it happen.

    Given the Bolt has proven GM can build a quality full electric car with acceptable range, and plans are moving for a lot more electrification, the handwriting on GM’s long-term sedan plans are clear.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      Something else is going on here. I do wonder if the huge amount of money spent between say since 2012 on (1) Cadillac boondoggles and (2) electrification boondoggles has put the company in a precarious situation.

      • 0 avatar
        APaGttH

        So you’re accusing the company of malfeasance and misreporting income, loss, operating expenses to the SEC??? You can read any quarterly filing and see the results – or are you saying they are fake?

        Electrification for GM was a boondoggle? They’re the second maker, only behind Tesla to hit the cap on electric car tax credits, and Tesla beat GM by 1 quarter. Total — boondoggle. The biggest competitor to the Volt is the Bolt sitting next to it on the showroom floor.

        What’s going on? The economic control panel is lighting up yellow – the big tariffs kick in January 1, 2019 and dear leader isn’t going to back down. Every bank is forecasting a major economic slow down in 2019.

        Ford was genius for getting ready for a recession in 2007 and GM is cooking the books for getting ready for a recession??? Ford is doing almost identical positioning – however their equity value is in the toilet and didn’t respond to their announcements. GM is up 6% on the news today. I guess all those institutional buyers don’t see what you see.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          I accuse them of boondoggles not of felonious acts. I don’t know how you jumped to cooking books.

          “Electrification for GM was a boondoggle?”

          Have they made any profit on electric cars of any stripe, and if so, does said profit recoup the investment New GM made to create the technology?

          I really don’t know but I’ll guess not a chance in hell. Electrification has been a financial boondoggle for GM as was the $12 billion investment in Cadillac.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            They wasted so much money on Cadillac and will have nothing to show for it. It’s all been an incredible failure.

  • avatar
    tomLU86

    re: Akear

    GM has not sown the seeds of destruction today.

    It has been sowing them for quite some time.

    Today’s move, while cold, is logical, given these plants low usage. Of the assembly plants, the Canadian one, in years past and thru today, has consistently delivered good to great quality and productivity.

    That seed was sown when GM refused to give them new product. Give the product to some one else.

    In general, GM was unable to make Opel work. There is your small car expertise. The Americans and Koreans are not as good at small cars.

    Bet on vehicles that ‘make more money’, even if they use more gas. Because gas will always be cheap.

    Those are the seeds of its undoing. Perhaps.

    Maybe the autonomous bet will pay off. But maybe not. Even so, the future GM will be a shadow–of it’s current shadow.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Another thing, where is Deadweight? I need my dose of dead weight hate.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    Yet another mistake made by GM in the name of cutting costs rather than building better products.

  • avatar
    raynla

    There is a phenomenon spreading throughout the automobile industry.
    It’s called “The Tesla Effect” and it has hit GM especially hard today. Toyota and Honda are next to compitulate. (MB, Audi and BMW are in meetings as I write this).
    I can see Tesla buying one or more of the shuttered plants to build its upcoming semi, pickup, roadster, and the Model Y.
    Some of the affected workers will be rehired albeit at a lower pay rate and no union representation.
    What most of you forget here is that Tesla is an “American” company, and that GM sells more cars in China than in the US.
    American inginuity saves the day again!
    After me…U.S.A-U.S.A-U.S.A

    • 0 avatar

      Tesla is indeed American ingenuity, but on the other hand companies like GM knee US ingenuity in the groin. GM always takes the easy way out and produces rubbish. If you don’t believe me sit in either a Blazer or Sierra.

  • avatar

    Folks, remember his day well (11-26-2018). This is the beginning of the end for the American auto industry. The US, like the British, will eventually end up building other nations cars. At least the Americans and English will still have Tesla and Rolls Royce.

    It is all up to Tesla now.

  • avatar
    Lichtronamo

    Regal and Regal wagon will also be gone as soon as the contract with PSA ends for their continued production following acquisition of Opel.

  • avatar
    Tstag

    GM need to merge or die. PSA or better still FCA would make a good move.

    Alternatively they should break themselves up to give their brands and employees the best chance of survival.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    GM closes up 4.8%.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    Question for the class – so the Sonic survives the axe?

    I know that earlier this year there were a ton of reports the Sonic would end as a 2018 model – there is a 2019 model. A refresh, if it happens is overdue.

    Does the Sonic become a B-segment tweener and go slightly larger to replace the outgoing Cruze?

  • avatar
    Lichtronamo

    The last two rental cars I’ve had have been CUVs, a Kia Sorento and a Nissan Rouge(I’d reserved a car, i.e., Impala/LaCrosse, but not available). Although a limited exposure, they provide insight into the wave towards CUVs over sedans. Most current sedans seem to want to be a 1st generation Merc CLS with a coupe like roof. This is probably due as much to needing to meet CAFE as style. The resulting car is hard to see out of, has no rear seat headroom even with a cushion on the floor, and a trunk aperture that you can’t get anything through. The ride is tuned to be a quasi-sports sedan on low profile tires that are noisy and hard riding. The CUV addresses each of these shortcomings plus easier accessibility (seat height) and availability of AWD for states like MN where I call home.

    As far as FCA, Ford, and GM killing their sedans it would seem that they are ahead of the curve. The CUV wave isn’t isolated to NA, but occurring in China and Europe too. Consider these moves as proactive. At the same time it is reasonable to question why Toyota, Nissan, and Kia/Hyundai continue building large sedans. Investing in a new Avalon (in addition to the Lexus ES), a Maxima, K9000, Credenza, et al seems like good money after bad. Some of these other car makers also need to re-evaluate other sedan segments they are in for continued investment.

    I think we’ll also see EVs and hybrids step into the void left by traditional sedans.

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      *golf clap*

      Nail meet hammer. Hammer meet nail.

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      The K900 and Cadenza sell well enough in Korea to support production.

      Plus, development costs are shared w/ Hyundai and Genesis.

      This may change in the future, but right now, large premium and lux sedans sell very well in Korea.

    • 0 avatar
      geozinger

      Lichtronamo: Sad to say, but I think you’re correct. SUV uber alles, and the sedans and cars we love are the first to go in the culling. Correct also, that SUV mania has taken/is taking over China and Europe. GM and the other domestics are doing what they need to do in order to avoid a repeat of 2008-09. I believe they know there’s no cavalry coming this time.

      WRT to the Japanese and Koreans still building sedans: They have no choice. For whatever reason, they did not recognize or refused to recognize the shift to SUV (although it seems to been more of a tipping point situation rather than the long, slow changeover predicted) and still have to produce sedans. Maybe they believe “the last man standing” theory of markets? Eventually, there won’t be enough money in that game, either.

      This sucks so much for the folks at the plants. I’m from Northeast Ohio, losing Lordstown will be a big blow for the area. The best of luck to all of those affected. Maybe some good will come of this.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      “This is probably due as much to needing to meet CAFE as style.”

      While general styling has been abhorrent, I have argued and still argue they have handicapped the cars on purpose in order to sell the same platform, CUV, for higher margin.

      “I think we’ll also see EVs and hybrids step into the void left by traditional sedans.”

      Interesting.

  • avatar
    pdog_phatpat

    Will the usual subjects hold GMs feet to the same fire they held Fords to after they shut down car production? I’m gonna take a stab at it and say no.

  • avatar
    raynla

    The irony here is that Tesla isn’t allowed to sell cars in Michigan!

  • avatar
    dusterdude

    Let me address the “elephant in the room” …I didn’t’ see any Mexican plants slated for closure in today’s announcement – not at all fair !!! . The US and Canada contributed BILLIONS of dollars 9 years ago ( in 2009) , and our reward is for plants to be closed, while Mexico isn’t touched . GM is definitely not being a fair and equitable corporate citizen to say the least, and will do serious harm to it’s reputation if today’s announcement stay “as is”..

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      Don’t despair dusterdude because I heard on Nightly Business Report this evening that GM is STILL HIRING, but they’re hiring a totally different autoworker now, one much more focused on tech, like Silicon Valley is.

      So there will be new, hi-tech GM products in the future, but Ms Barra had to get rid of all the dead wood and repulsive products first.

      The plants in Mexico make products that sell. The plants being closed made products that didn’t sell.

      Keep a little perspective here. Look at the whole picture.

      Yes, it’s going to be tough for the people who are going to be unemployed but every body should understand that all products have a life cycle. The models discontinued didn’t sell well and are at the end of their life cycle.

      Out with the old, in with the new.

      And as far as President Trump getting the blame here, that’s nonsense. So GM loses 15K workers, but the economy has gained MILLIONS of new workers.

      GM’s laid-off workers can find new work, if they want to. There are millions of jobs in the US that are currently vacant and go unfilled due to lack of worker bees.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        “The plants in Mexico make products that sell. The plants being closed made products that didn’t sell. ”

        So why are they closing the White Marsh plant in Maryland?

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        “And as far as President Trump getting the blame here, that’s nonsense. So GM loses 15K workers, but the economy has gained MILLIONS of new workers.”
        — Just not in automotive, which is one place he said would GAIN workers.

        Oh, and coal is still on a slide, too.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          What he has done up to date is already truly amazing. Would you really want to go back to the ways and means of the last administration?

          Give Ms Barra some credit for the transformational change she’s bringing to GM. Yeah, the people being laid off and the products being discontinued no longer fit in the GM of today or tomorrow.

          Help re-elect Trump in 2020 and see what other great things will come the way of all American citizens.

          Maybe by then, China will have auto plants in the Southern US employing American workers, like Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Subaru, VW, BMW, et al.

          A lot of coal is still being exported which means that the US is collecting the revenues, not some other coal-producing country.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @hdc: First off, this is a forum about cars, not politics; though I acknowledge that the forum’s author is the one that broke this, as it were. I’d rather be talking cars.

            That said, You’re right, what he has done is amazing… Amazingly stupid, that is. Not ONE of his Executive Orders or other policies has been to the benefit of the American People; it’s all to the benefit of corporations. And by now we all should know “trickle down economics” doesn’t work.

            As for Ms Barra’s “transformational change”, I actually thought she was doing pretty good… until this announcement. I thought she was going to fix what her predecessors had done but instead she has doubled-down on a “me-too” strategy instead of leading with new, innovative products. The Chevy Volt was at least somewhat innovative but the Bolt just ain’t cuttin’ the mustard. Intentionally limiting the production to only 20k-25k units has let Tesla leap ahead in the mid-sized BEV market by nearly 10 times, despite Tesla’s slow start with the Model 3.

            And our economy is headed for the dumps, unless things change. Trump has increased the cost of manufacturing cars, which means greater expense to people who can’t even afford the current models. The same is true for almost all products made in the US, one way or another. Oh, he’s been able to delay some of those increases but every “deal” he’s made so far has increased costs and increased debt at a record pace and I think he not only knows this but plans to hand this off to a Democratic replacement and say something like, “See? He can’t even balance the budget!” It certainly won’t be the first time but his predecessor at least had debt headed towards black before The Donald took over.

            And as for your coal statement; sure, coal and American oil and gas are being exported, but the income isn’t balancing the cost of the Middle-Eastern crude being imported; we’re at a net negative in petroleum trading, as we are in almost every form of trade because of current policies. Trump made it quite clear he didn’t want Canada in the tripartite free-trade agreements and it looks like he’s managed to succeed.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Vulpine, it’s all in the eye (and pocketbook) of the beholder, and I would much rather have the Trump economy, with energy exports, oil pipelines, low unemployment, lower food stamps and welfare recipients, etc, than that of the previous failed administration.

            BTW, I didn’t start the political slant. I merely set things straight in that there is much less gloom and doom with Trump than there was with the previous guy.

            Not everyone sees the same facts the way you do.

            But the bottom line always is, “Are we better off during the current Trump administration than we were during the administration of the last (spread America’s wealth around) guy?”

            I think all this tariff crap is going to iron out over the next two years, maybe even sooner, like after the G20 meet next month.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @HDC: “Vulpine, it’s all in the eye (and pocketbook) of the beholder, and I would much rather have the Trump economy, with energy exports, oil pipelines, low unemployment, lower food stamps and welfare recipients, etc, than that of the previous failed administration.”

            Tell me that in two years, assuming he holds office that much longer.

  • avatar
    geozinger

    Like I posted further up the string, this sucks so much for the folks at the plants.

    I’m from Northeast Ohio, losing Lordstown will be a big blow for the area.

    The best of luck to all of those affected.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    I can only say one thing: The unions have done it to themselves. Long, long ago, said unions served a real purpose to protect the employees from abusive corporations. But who was there to protect the corporations from abusive unions?

    I’ve been a union worker; it seemed great while I was working but then all of a sudden, the jobs disappeared. Why? They went overseas, where labor cost much, much less.

    • 0 avatar
      Erikstrawn

      GM’s pension plan was fully funded in the 80s, then Congress changed laws and allowed companies to pilfer their pension funds. GM blew through their employee’s pension plan in about ten years, and then complained that pensions were unaffordable and that the union was bleeding them dry. I don’t blame the unions near as much as I blame GM’s inept and lazy management.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        @Erikstrawn: I’ll admit I can’t refute that statement; you could well be right.

        However, having a pay scale that has “skilled labor” making twice as much per hour as equivalently-placed workers in any other industry suggests that the unions have grossly overtaxed the corporate economy (even discounting pensions). This, among other things has raised the average price of cars to almost triple their MSRP in the last 25 years and more than 10x the MSRP in the last 50.

        What I’m saying is that both sides are at fault and the government has been complicit on both sides in different ways.

  • avatar
    RS

    How does GM (or Ford, or FCA) meet future MPG targets after canceling most of the high MPG vehicles in their portfolio?

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      CAFE is no longer a Corporate Average. Each car has is onw weighted sales average target based on its footprint. Additionally there are different standards for cars and trucks. However you can trade credits between vehicles of the same or different class. It is sales weighted so those slow sellers aren’t going to have much effect either way. Its all about the trucks for GM’s fuel economy compliance.

  • avatar
    jthorner

    Gotta love those tariffs on imported steel and aluminum, eh? The tarriffs didn’t just increase the price of imports, they increased the price of domestic produced metals as well.

    Which industry consumes the most steel and aluminum in the US?

  • avatar
    bigbearvo

    Typical of American manufacturers… short-sighted, interested only in shareholder value, not in competing at a high level of quality and customer satisfaction over the long term. GM is losing billions in its electric division, while Toyota is positioning itself to own the market in every vehicle segment as technology changes over the next 20 years. State of the art plants being built here, and young design teams working on trail-blazing products, while the American companies pick up the pieces of yet another failed strategy. Toyota and Honda have no plans to discontinue the Accord, Corolla, Camry or Avalon. I have no doubt they’ll gladly hire some of those experienced laid off GM workers who built the Impala, Cruze and Volt. They’ll also gladly add disenchanted GM buyers to their growing list of satisfied customers. I chose an American car for the first time in decades when I bought first a Ford Escape Hybrid in 2008, then a 2016 Impala. Great vehicles, great design. Poor marketing execution by a poorly managed company. The Impala led the pack in the Consumer Reports ratings two years running. Why not build on that success, instead of forcing sedan lovers and Hybrid SUV fans to the foreign competition? Now I’ll be leaving thousands of dollars on the table when I’m forced to sell the Impala and move on to a more trustworthy, high quality, well-run company. I’ll move to an Avalon, Camry or Accord, or if I choose an SUV, it’ll be a Subaru or Toyota. And it will be the last time I trust an American car company.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • WildcatMatt: Dad picked up a used ’68 Beetle to weather OPEC II, one with the “AutoStick” so Mom...
  • salmonmigration: Is this a time traveler from the distant past?? The first-gen Tacoma that had that issue stopped...
  • jh26036: You miss the best part then, putting quality miles on a car you just bought. These big sedans eat up miles...
  • WildcatMatt: See! I knew Taco Bell had to be involved!
  • ToolGuy: Showing up at Bank of America to report financial theft is sweetly ironic. (cimarron and thelaine, i’m...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States