Toyota First? Maybe Third?

Maybe if GM had a better working relationship with the media, then they would get the respect they deserve. It's all about image and Toyota is always able to put a positive spin on everything they do to make them look like the heros. Whining about everything Toyota or other companies say isn't going to help though. GM needs to produce something noteable to get noticed, and then reasonably flaunt it without being a 'poor sport' and rubbing it in the competitions face. People get sick of that.

Give 'em HELL, Tom Stephens! GM needs more fighting spirit like this. I'm happy to see that GM is willing to call it straight.

GM has taken enough guff - time to dish some out.

Esprit de corp is infectious - keep it up, Tom!

I want to applaud you for calling Toyota on their inaccurate statement. While their PR department is exellent at their job, all too often they make things look better than they are or they effectively minimize problems. While I have not been in one of the hybrid buses, I have had the chance to drive the hybrid Silverado, and it is quite functional, and the added effeciency in town is very helpful, not to mention the fact that it can work as a generator. I doubt that a Toyota hybrid is that flexible.

Arguing who's first over an innovation is a tired marketing game. Thomas Edison did not invent the first electric light bulb, nor did NBC have the first color Television. Neverless those people get the "credit" because they were better marketed.

It's interesting that GM had hybrid bus systems before Toyota. But Toyota and Honda introduced the first hybrid systems for CARS, and are still way out in front in that arena.

GM can get its share of this limelight by offering its own, hopefully better, version of a hybrid drive, or perhaps innovative direct-injection gas or diesel engines with lower pollution and higher mileage while providing the ample power most buyers crave.

Right on, Brother! Show 'em who's da Man.

I live in the Northeast, NJ, but where are the GM buses?
GM needs to have these buses in the East and West coast so many people can see them. How about buses for all of the thousands of people who commute to and from NJ to NY. And as you know many of these people drive import cars on the east coast and have a negative view about GM and their lack of hybrid technology, so they think.

GM needs to do a better job of informing people about their product, you have to change their preconceived feelings about GM. I know about GM and their cars very well but that is because I am a big fan. I love Chevrolet and GM, to prove it, I have a chevy bowtie emblemn embedded in my paver driveway, but I am tired of GM getting beat to the punch!

Its things like this that GM worries about that makes them look terrible. " I did it first" sounds like a 3rd grade response. Toyota's hybrid technology will forever be ahead of GM's. Toyota is first to market with a RWD car... does that sound better? Do you recall the debate about who sold more trucks with Ford? GM was wrong. Or how about that $2billion you tried hiding recently that made the loss a $10billion one? That made you look stable. If GM has the technology, bring it to market! Show me a car that is not ugly and gets 40mpg+. Stop trying to prove you're better than everyone else when its obvious you are losing market share rapidly. But if name calling makes you feel important and "being first" sounds cool, keep doing it. I put my bets on Toyota taking over GM by 2010. And by egging on the little brother, you only piss it off. Worry about GM before you worry about anyone else.

You guys may have gotten Toyota on a technicality, but they are still ahead of the game in the general world of hybrid technology - the Lexus RX330h and Toyota Prius are well established, highly reguarded passenger vehicles.

You must feel all warm and fuzzy getting Toyota on that little slip up.

Developments in the ethanol market are accelerating and here is why. In North Dakota, for example they estimate half of the corn crop can go to ethanol production. Companies are in a race to claim their share of the harvest because once that supply is spoken for, there cannot be any new large scale ethanol factories. The first and few that get in will get the prize.

This scenario is now being repeated throughout the mid-west and as a result there is an explosion of ethanol factories coming on line or in the planning stages.

Even in my birthplace, Toms River, NJ they just announced a tire to fuel grade ethanol plant and another corn based plant in Brandon NJ.

I know its's hard to get imports weaned off the mother's milk of foreign oil, but come on, chew the corn. Lets save the mother's milk for the fledgling economies, it's time to grow up and start using the baby teeth as we grow to a more mature and independent and self sustaining form of energy.

GM you have to make these hybrids also E85 ethanol ready, I don't know how to say this but you can't move fast enouph. The roads are not getting any smaller and big beautiful Hummers and Buicks have an integral place on the broad American landscape. Secure and protect your future and Americas too, keep pushing ethanol and hybrids.

Tell Bob I am going to Australia. I am going to go to Holdens design center. I am not going to get in the way I will just stay in the corner with the FJ Efijy to my left and a Buick 8 to my right. I am carrying a bull horn in my left hand and a foghorn in my right. Just to make sure their new rear drive Buicks capture all the important elements and characteristics of the Buick tradition and the Efijy's fundamentals.

Seriously, this is the most important most critical, and most crucial time in the history of GM, Buick and its design efforts. It's not a time to be timid you gotta be brave or you will render Buick to the scrap heap and GM into a downward spiral which no man can save. That is not going to happen all of the answers are already within you and in your grasp.

Message to GM about customers. When they are looking, they are buying and how many people surrounded the Efijy dispay? That is the kind of car Buick needs.

I went to a Harley-Davidson dealership a week ago. Where is Buick going? Buick is the Harley-Davidson of the automobile industry; Period. GM better get a page from Harley's book because even Hondas are looking a lot more like Harleys these days.

I don't know how high GM will take this but one thing is certain, you have to believe before you get there.

Look, if your not out to design the best looking Buick in history it's not going to be me that is going to be your problem.

After the trucks, where will the hybrid systems go? A high-performance hybrid Cobalt making 40 mpg and 200+ hp would be one impressive compact. Or how about hybrid Cadillacs going up against German diesels?

I hate to put it this bluntly, but by all indications GM lacks the technical ability to build and market a hybrid CAR, like the Prius or Civic, as opposed to hybrid TRUCK like the Vue.

Everybody I know who has bought a hybrid, about 6 or 7 friends and relatives, never even considered buying a truck like the Vue or Ford Escape, and why should they? The whole point is to use as little gas as possible.

Please, can GM just build excellent cars--with or without hybrid systems? I think this is the first challenge. Why do consumers who'd like to buy your products always suffer with cars that unstylishly show off their low budget engineering?

Honestly, what was Bob Lutz thinking when he helped Buick "hone" the styling of the Lacrosse? Or bringing a reworked 4-year old Holden to America without redoing the styling (the GTO)? Or the new Lucerne? Or the rental-fleet only Malibu?

Why can't GM settle on a naming convention for any of their cars, or a correct pricing scheme for that manner (how many times have we heard the phrase "no more discounts" only to see March Madness promotions)? Why has nearly every model nameplate been discarded in the past 3 years--to be replaced with some alpha numeric copy-cat scheme? I guess this was some MBA's idea...What was wrong with actual car names in the first place? The name wasn't a damaged good, the car that last wore its badge was just subpar.

Come on GM, your cars are certainly good, but by no means best in class.

Oh, and please tell Paul Ballew (Exec. Director of Sales, etc.) to stop spinning every number he can come up with to the press to show how GM's sales are improving...we're not stupid.

If you want better press, maybe you should be schmoozing the press the way Toyota does. A journalist friend of mine was just at the Lexus GS450h launch at a luxury resort in AZ, and they all got iPods as gifts. What has GM given out lately? Meanwhile, he just got a new Tahoe evaluation vehicle back in CT, which he's impressed with, but it's not even top of the line... no heated seats, no nav, etc. Are you sure you have the right people running your media events, press fleet and operations? My guess is definitely not! The Corvette convertible he got for eval last year had the power top fail on him out on the road in mid-cycle -- not good!

IMO, if you present GM as a first class organization in meaningful ways at these press launches, (nice locales, premium accomodations, expensive gifts, etc.) and make the cream of the crop, fully loaded and carefully prepped models ONLY available for evaluation, you just might get a lot more respect from them, no? You can't just have Bob Lutz tell them how great you are. You think these people can't be bought? Years of Honda and Toyota kissy-fests from the media tells me they can be!

Bob Larson
2004 Corvette coupe
2005 Envoy XUV

They're crying all the way to the bank.

The problem is you guys still don't BELIEVE in hybrid technology like they do and your company is paying for that error.

001

You guys have to keep the pressure on, don't stop. Call the competetion out; point out your positives. Deep down ,people WANT to by American. Tell them why did should. Forego the emphasis on price, focus on innovation. Make your commercials more technical! Even if people don't understand they LOVE ti brag about their cars "high tech " features.

Mr. B. Talley and Joe are right on.
Mr. Stephens got Toyota's PR on a technicality.

Here's an accurate statement that Toyota (or anyone else) can make:

"GM doesn't manufacture hybrid cars in 2006 more than six years after the first hybrid cars were commercially available."

Spin one for me Mr. Stephens and I'll by a GM hybrid car.

Take your shots when you get them! I was almost hired by GM Powertrain in Windsor just before the hiring freeze hit in 2001. Oh well. I still want you guys to do well and I still work in the industry. Good luck and please get back in the black so we can all drop the negative talk. You guys deserve much better. When the good times were good you gave the union what they wanted. Now that the good times are gone... well they do not want to accept any part of the losses. The UAW employees must remember all the times they caused in system mutilation or "forgot" to insert something correctly. The battle is won with each and every car you produce. Each individual customer needs a positive experience with every product they purchase. Your product is getting better, but it needs to get ahead. Keep it simple with advertising, product design, and pricing. Clean and simple - GM. Not every GM brand needs a model to compete with another brand. Pick your battles like you did here with Toyota.

You guys are missing one of the key points here: GM choose to invest it's hybrid efforts on it's largest vehicles first: busses, then full-size trucks/suv's, and then onto cars. Do you really want to make a difference in America's fuel usage and reducing our emissions? Then you can't fault GM's approach. GM's stance of "large vehicles first" will result in vastly larger fuel savings and reduced emissions than Honda/Toyota's approach (which appear, in contrast, to be the vain pursuit of a green public image). It looks to me like GM 'out-greened' Honda and Toyota on this one.

Kudo's to GM for doing it right - even if it means they can't join the consumer-car hybrid-hype market cultured by Honda and Toyota.

Brian Talley, you need to read more on GM's recent "additional" $2 billion loss that you claim they tried to hide. Of that $2 billion, $1.9 billion was additional write-off to cover future liabilities concerning Delphi. That money hasn't been payed out yet, just accounted for. There wasn't anything being hid, but you probably didn't know that because most news stories don't report the full truth.

I think we need to maintain a sense of what Toyota is today and where GM, Ford ETC are today.

We also must be realistic of where we all will be in the market place tomorrow.

With new brands from Korea and China emerging (Quickly) we need to realize that we must address the issues of quality of product and service now.

Who, with common sense, will debate the quality of Toyota and Honda products and service? Who will debate that driving a Honda made in the US is different than one made in Japan, try and see the difference.

Korea is rapidly gaining reputation in the market place for quality of product and service.

Make a service call for an American Brand and make one for an import, notice a difference?

We may kid ourselves about our brands and where we stand in the world market place today. What position will we be in 25 years from now? Will we still be kidding ourselves? Will we be looking at American icons like Ford and GM as number 8th or 9th in the market place behind other brands?

Only "we" can control our destiny.

First we must realize where we are and where we want to be.

We must look back at the last 50 years at what management gave into labor for the sake of not dealing prudently with labor issues.

What management gave away in bonuses and frivolous salaries?

What shareholders gave away by not keeping management and labor's feet to the fire and holding them accountable.

What the people in the company gave away by not holding their sense of pride and quality, workmanship in product and service.

Once we all address these issues seriously then we can effectively deal with controlling our destiny.

Dear Mr. Lutz,

I really like what you're doing and I really like GM, but I think GM is going down very fast bacause GM don't know or don't want to produce CARS. All you think about is TRUCKS.

People buy hybrid vehicles because they care about the environment. People that care about the environment don't drive trucks or SUV's !

GM should concentrate on making CARS.

When FIAT was is in trouble, it was the small car ,"uno", that saved the company (now it's the new "punto"). When PEUGEOT was in trouble, it's small car ,"205", helped the comapny for years. Same thing with the RENAULT and other automakers.
The market share of GM CARS is shrinking every day, and it seems like the executives do nothing about it.

We know trucks are more profitable than cars, but we all know that for most of the people, a car is the right vehicle, and people who realize that, don't buy GM, because GM don't know how to build cars.
For exemple, a car manufacturer that builds a car like the CADILLAC DTS with front wheel drive is either making a joke or should go to a shrink. This car is too big, too strong, too heavy and too expensive to be a front wheel drive. I know that some customers will buy big jokes like the DTS, but people are getting smarter everyday, and you can't fool most of the people.
Another example ? GM America (unlike GM Europe) offers the customers cars with OHV engines! Even "new" cars like the buick lucerne !!. personally, I think it's embarrassing and outrages to sell a car with this kind of an engine, and It's unbelievable that the same company offers a great engine like the ECOTEC (which was the developed by opel, as far as I remember).

I really like what you did with the solstice. This car is an example for everyone to see that the "world's largest automaker" can build a great car. a car you want to drive.

Now, GM's divisions should offer the americans a good medium sized american family sedan (but don't forget the camaro...).

Buy the way, I live in ISRAEL and I'm a big fan of american cars.

One of the previous posters probably had it right when he said GM is unable (for whatever reason) to make hybrid cars right now. Perhaps someone's waiting for batteries to get cheaper, or waiting to shed some unprofitability before enduring a little loss to get a new line started?

In the meantime, go look at sales numbers for any of the hybrid cars that get over 40mpg. Then go look at how long the waiting list is for such. If that doesn't tell you anything about how the American public feels about buying vehicles that get significantly better fuel mileage, then nothing will.

In a world with Google and blogs it's pretty stupid for ANY company to lie to the public, intentionally or by lack of research.

Hybrids are just a stop-gap solution anyways. I wouldn't bet the farm on that market.

I'm really looking forward to the day when our vehicles no longer require any gasoline at all. The environmental benefits are great and all, but I'm more interested in seeing how the middle east survives when they actually have to work for a living.

Imagine my surprise when I finished reading this blog.

Tom Stephens, Vice President of GM Powertrain, next time you write something like this, you should definitely do more research.

It only adds to the embarassment when high level GM employees make such kind of statements. I would suggest you focus less on technicalities and focus more on product.

Toyota could easily provide a rebuttal to this post to prove you wrong, but Toyota most likely won't do that, as they don't bother to squabble over such technicalities.

The problem with this blog post is that Toyota has had diesel hybrid buses in Japan since 1997. And yes, we're talking RWD buses. Before you question the credibility of this, do some thorough research and look it up.

Most people do not consider the Silverado Hybrid a true hybrid propulsion system, because the electric generator does not aide propulsion in any way. For propulsion, the Silverado Hybrid still relies completely on the gas engine. Of course this to some is just a technicality, and some do refer to the Silverado Hybrid as a "mild hybrid".

Toyota touts that the GS450h has the "world's first longitudinal CVT transmission". Now when you thoroughly do some research, this is true.

The Silverado Hybrid does not use a CVT transmission.

And although GM's hybrid buses use a longitudinal CVT, they are *not* commercially mass-produced vehicles. On top of which, Toyota predates the GM hybrid buses by several years with their diesel hybrid buses in Japan.

So Toyota's statement about it's CVT tranny still holds true. And if you do not consider, as many don't, the Silverado Hybrid as a true hybrid vehicle, then Toyota's statement about the "world's first rear wheel drive hybrid" also holds true.

Tom Stephens,

Way to go. Don't stop.

Finally, someone at GM has the guts to set the record straight.

The American media act like suck ups to Toyota, and are far too lenient. The media have been quick to report false hype and lax in reporting the truth in the auto industy.

Why not mention the horsepower claims by Toyota that had to be revised downward for 2006? The same media has been covering for Toyota. Why not mention Toyota trying to include it's subsidiary Diahatsu in its annual sales figures?

A suggestion would be for GM to start bragging openly about its accomplishments in televised commercials over and over again. Tell the truth more loudly than Toyota's obnoxious commericals. The pro-Japanese media won't toot GM's horn.

Its time for GM to be bold with the message and tell the public GM leads in technology and innovation, that is the truth.

GM should use the media's phrase "high feature" when describing OHV powertrain advantages.

Advertise the bold raw truth.

I think that Hybrids are alittle over hyped.Some magazines I have read dont see how you save when after just 3,4 years you have to replace the batteries which by no means is pocket change they cost thousands of dollers to replace.Does that mean just to give up on them I dont think so but clearly the technology has got to be better.E85 is surely a avenue to explore.Brazil has many of its cars running on E100 from sugar cane that they produce clearly if they can do it WHY CANT WE?One of our biggest resources is our FARM LAND maybe having partnerships with companies like ADM and getting more people to establish ETHANOL FARMS threw Franchising?could go along in helping GM.Active Fuel Management is also very helpful how many times has many of us got caught up in a traffic jam and watch that gas gauge go down.Having half of the motor just firing can only help.When the Newly designed Silverados come out with Flex Fuel I will be very tempted to buy one.

Guys, what's with this hype about ethanol? The way it's done here in the US, it's a net energy loser. It takes more energy (in the form of fossil fuels used to till the soil, plant the seeds, harvest the corn, refine it into ethanol, etc, in addition to the fossil resources used to make fertilizers & pesticides) than you actually get from using the ethanol later. In other words, ethanol has an EROI of less than 1.0.

(Hydrogen too has an EROI of less than 1.0, making it yet another energy loser.)

Ethanol provides only 67% of the energy available from an equivalent volume of gasoline. The production of ethanol is possible now only because it is heavily subsidized by the government, to the tune of above $0.50/gallon.

Check out the numbers as to how much land would need to be given over to producing ethanol to wean us off fossil oil. Someone has put all that together at:
http://healthandenergy.com/ethanol.htm

Hybrids aren't hype. A whole group of them average above 40mpg (see http://www.greenhybrid.com/compare/mileage/)
and some above 50mpg.

Any competent physicist can tell you why it's not possible to make truly serious fuel-efficiency improvements to SUVs:

1. Weight
2. Rolling friction, friction in drivetrain, etc
3. Barn door aerodynamics

So don't go looking for that 5,500 lb. Yukon Denali that gets 50mpg ~ it's not going to happen. Smaller, lighter, more aerodynamic vehicles will always require less _energy_ to accelerate them or move them uphill.

The real question is, why is GM asleep at the wheel again on these things?

An Open Letter to GM (Mis)management

As a salaried retiree with 37 years of proud service, I have been the eternal optimist relative to the strength and competence of our company and it’s high quality, competitively priced and attractively styled vehicle product line. I have been a vocal advocate to countless former, current and potential customers for our trucks and cars and have done so with pride and conviction. It’s been tougher to convince listeners since I’ve been in Florida – a state where you would hardly know GM was still in business and with a population that could care less if it wasn’t.

My pride and confidence has taken some real hits in the last several years as I’ve witnessed a series of false starts, missteps, poor execution, and apparent corporate arrogance and indifference toward the major constituents. Market share continues to shrink, employment levels continue to sink, dealers are angry and upset, morale (both salaried and hourly) is dismal, suppliers are at their wits end, and the analysts have been spewing forth a unrelenting flood of negative opinion that flatly concludes bankruptcy is inevitable.

I heard quotes over this period of time that the objective is to “sustain the enterprise”, which seems to mean that executive compensation is more important then action that promotes and results in increased value to the shareholders. They are, afterall, the owners of the company and have suffered as much if not more than any of the constituency groups while the stock plunged from $95 a share to a recent low of $18. At least the dividend was being maintained until the hoped for stock price recovery - a dividend that was pegged at $2 several years back with the rational that it would be “sustainable in good or bad years”. However, with the stock at historic all time lows and few buyers in sight, somehow the decision was reached (at further pain to the shareholders) to cut the dividend in half – this is supposed to attract more buyers? This is to show the stockholders some level of consideration for the astounding loss of value of their investment?

I flinched at billions poured down a rat hole called Fiat with nothing that I could see received in return. I’ve watched the Delphi spin off blow up into more billions of dollars in liability due to the numerous fish hooks in the agreement that pull dollars out of our reserves. I’ve witnessed the continual erosion of benefit levels and costs to the salaried ranks when the UAW members went virtually untouched. Even the recent health care concessions pale by comparison to the differential between hourly and salaried contributions for their benefits. The just announced accounting fiasco puts the bitter frosting on the cake called incompetence. We send the clear message to the public that we don’t know how much money we made or lost because we couldn’t keep track of it. And, afterall, what’s the big deal – we were only off a couple of billion in lost earnings. Yep, that’ll promote buyer confidence and bring them flocking into the showrooms.

Perhaps most disturbing of all, there seems to have been a retreat from the battle of winning back the hearts and minds of the analysts and buyers. Rick, I rarely hear from you or of you. Surely you remember what happened when Chrysler was in trouble and needed the federal bail out? Iacocca went on counterattack and became the face and voice of the company. He took a $1 a year salary and was firm, consistent and confident to the public about his company. I’ll never forget his mantra “if you can find a better product, buy it”. Rick, we desperately need that from you (or someone who can articulate the message) and we need it now.

We’ve let our great company get so ridiculously undervalued that I’m hardly surprised that you’ve now got billionaire investors buying huge stakes at below fire sale prices. Their objective then becomes one of forcing whatever action they can influence (does the name Jerry York ring a bell?) that will promote their short term outlook for a stock run up from their low purchase price.

Frankly, I’ll tell you how bad it is with me – if Kirk can do anything to get a focus on increasing shareholder value (while he makes his billions) I’m all for it, even if it means breaking up the company and selling off all the assets. Let’s get this show back on track and let’s get the stock price back at a respectable level. And, if the current team can’t – or won’t - accomplish this, then we need a new team.

GM caught Toyota on a technicality, which may or may not be true based on what "definition" of hybrid you use.

I feel appalled that my earlier comments about the truth of this matter were not posted. It seems as though GM does not want the truth to be known, on this blog at least. It shames me as a GM fan to say the least.

Although technically GM is perhaps ahead in this particular segment, but in public’s eye, it is not the leading company for mass-production hybrid cars. To really get ahead of competition, GM should bring to market a hybrid that is priced no more expensive than similar car with only combustion engine.

That bus might as well be in Siberia for the impact on my needs. What about the fact that GM created a prototype minivan before the first Chrysler? But GM, in all it's corporate genius, failed to make it. Worse still, GM's minivans were, and are, not competitive---even after Chrysler, Toyota, and Honda showed them how to do it. Finally, those minivans were designed to be a "global product," which brings us to your current schemes to save your corporate butt.

GM is really first in hybrid and variable valve timing development. But sad to note that only in North America GM offers the customers cars and small suvs with OHV engines. GM should only offer OHV for full size suv and pick-up trucks (with displacement above 4.2L). The '05 equinox will be my last GM vehicle. I promise not to purchase GM vehicle anymore if it is not equipped with OHC with intake/exhaust VVT! But for fullsize trucks, small block OHV is still the best!

Bob Larson: any journalist who has to be given a free iPod to write something nice about a vehicle ought to have his journalistic license revoked. Vehicles should be evaluated on their merits, not on how nice the vacation was.

To Stan and the other ethanol fans:

Can anyone please explain to me the logic of using ethanol as a fuel? Ethanol is what's called a net energy loser: it requires more energy to make the ethanol than you actually get from burning it, particularly in a low-efficiency application like an ICE. By this I'm including the energy required to till the ground, plant the seeds, harvest the stuff, transport it to the refinery, refine it, store it, and deliver it to the pump, etc, as well as the fossil fuels required to make the fertilizers & pesticides needed to achieve yields of above 200 gallons per acre of corn. See the following for some excellent information about ethanol:
http://healthandenergy.com/ethanol.htm

Hybrids DO work (but see the qualifiers below). Otherwise why would GM be investing tens of millions into the project? For some real-world efficiency data, go see:
http://www.greenhybrid.com/compare/mileage/

Hybrids work best only when the car manufacturer has done the necessary work to lower the general energy requirements of the vehicle in question. These include making the vehicle lighter, lower to the ground, with smooth undersides and a very low coefficient of drag. This is just plain physics. It's also why you'll never see a 6,000lb Yukon Denali (with way too much weight, way too much rolling & drivetrain friction, and with the aerodynamics of a New England barn) getting 50mpg. It simply requires too much energy to accelerate the thing and move it uphill.

Comments please?

OMG. During a week in which the big story was GM, Delphi and the UAW coming to an agreement that will lead to GM cutting 30,000 jobs and perhaps finally stopping the labor cost bleeding, the best you all can come up with is "Toyota wasn't first, we were first!"

The UAW story could be seen as a long-term positive for your organization if you cared to discuss it. And, you probably should discuss it because outside of Fantasylane here, the word is that this deal was your last chance to stave off bankruptcy.

Unfortunately labor costs aren't GM's only problem, as demonstrated by your insignificant post.

Touche', mon amie.

But when it comes to hybrids, unfortunately GM missed the boat.

Customers buy hybrids because of the superior gas mileage and the nouveau "green" cachet it portends. That works well with small economy boxes.

But not so well with oversized SUVs. Yeah, it is attractive to get better MPGs in what would otherwise be a RWD Yankee gas guzzler. But the real shock is the extra $6950 premium on the sticker price that scares them away.

Methinks you will have to have to convert your Green machines to green-backs fairly soon through some sort of incentive sale again, ugh.

Get organized.
CADILLAC should only be RWD.
CHEVROLET (Cobalt, Malibu, Impala, Monte Carlo) should be FWD (but RWD for Camaro, Corvette, Caprice, Nomad and El Camino)
PONTIAC should be only RWD
BUICK should be only AWD

And SATURN should be your hybrid and alternative energy products.

Customers can relate to that kind of simplified scenario.
NO OVERLAPPING, REDUNDANT REBADGES IN THIS MIX, IS THERE?

First doesn't mean BETTER

Well, GM, you certainly got some points here!

Maybe now, everyone will stop buying wonderful, reliable, and innovative imports and start buying some GM-manufactured buses!

This will get the company out of the toilet! Yay for GM1

I think that you grab the young generation now, and if you continue to give them what they want, there will be brand loyalty.

And the way to do this (for a start) is tuner cars right out of the factory. Trick some of your cars instead of aftermarketers doing it with all the right parts.

There were 70 million+ baby boomers, and now there are 60 million+ Y-generation. Grab the latter and hold on with a bull dog grip!

This doesn't mean abandon the boomers. Get some top notch styling on your next generation of cars, and it will drive them into the showrooms.

(Of course durability should not be taken for granted).

Dear Mr. Stephens,
I think, there's a similar situation over here. Mass-media in Germany also claim (for example), that Mercedes Benz offered the first car with an airbag (we know it was the Oldsmobile Toronado) or invented "night-vision" (I first saw it at a Cadillac). The same way a BMW was not the very first car with a head-up-display or daytime running lamps. I think there is an enormous need for GM to improve the awareness of its technological achievements in public. I don't know how it is in the States, but here in Germany you even have the possibility by law, to force mass-media to publish a contrary statement, if any report, concerning you as a person or your company, obviously doesn't tell the true story. So you should check out your opportunities to fight the prejudice against GM. There's a lot of work to do, when I read all the garbage about GM, even at newspapers over here.

That's what I've been talking about!

Hit 'em back.

Now, hit 'em with the inflated horsepower figures deception.

You know... the one where Toyota has consistently been lying about the power output of their powertrains for YEARS - until the advent of the SAE standard recently where they had to come clean and pretty much revise their figures DOWN universally.

Impala + direct injection 5.3L DOD V8 + 6spd automatic should bury the Toyota V6 for power AND fuel economy.

Get that one done in a hurry!

Timing is everything. I'm afraid the GM hybrid SUVs will hit the market about the time that most of the public finally realizes that hybrids aren't cost effective at current fuel costs. Also the "early adopters" will be footing the bill for fresh batteries in their Prius cars and finding out the true life-cycle cost of ownership.
I believe a better strategy would be to lead the way in small diesels, hopefully using the technology developed from the huge Fiat project costs.

I have a few questions for all of you that are touting Japanese vehicles. Who buys your products or services? Is it the Japanese? I’m not talking about immigrants. What I’m talking about is countriy. Have you ever tried to export your product or service to other countries? Do you understand the economic advantages some companies have when their countries control the value of their currency rather than letting the free market set the exchange rates? Do you know what our current trade deficit is?

Like most everyone else, when I purchase a product I want the best available for the price I’m able to pay. However, why should I buy a product from a foreign company whose government will not allow our businesses to sell products or services in their country?

Just something to think about when your biggest customer tells you they are going out of business because they can no longer compete with the foreign companies. On that day the drive home in your Lexus should be very enjoyable.

John, your post didn't bring any news to us. The facts speak for themselves.

The press reports that the GS450h will be "the world's first commercially mass produced hybrid system especially designed for rear-wheel drive vehicles" are not correct. The Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra hybrids are mass produced, commercially available rear-wheel drive hybrid vehicles that went on sale in 2004.

Toyota's materials from their Hawaiian press event don't mention CVT and only state that the L110 is the "world's first longitudinal hybrid transmission," and that's not correct either. You astutely point out that Toyota introduced the Coaster hybrid bus system in 1997, so are you saying the L110 isn't even a Toyota first? By the
way, the Coaster hybrid was a series, not parallel hybrid. You also neglected to mention Mercedes' OE 302 hybrid bus system in 1969. In any event, we do know there were longitudinal hybrid transmissions -- definitely including the GM Allison hybrid propulsion system -- prior to the L110.

We respect Toyota's technical capability but we simply want consumers to receive accurate information.

Kyle Johnson
GM Powertrain Communications

Answer this: Back in the day, why were people buying CDs when everyone else was using cassettes and CD's were more expensive, needed different players, and not as convenient as cassettes? It was because it was new technology, offered better quality and look around...everyone uses cd's. This applies to hybrids. Even though they are not the most cost effective they are the new way of living. Cleaner emissions, better fuel economy. If I have one gallon of fuel in my hybrid car left, I know I can still drive for another 40, 50 miles as opposed to 25 miles. Better get on the bandwagon and adapt to the new way of life...hybrids.

I've seen alot of very negative comments about GM and their approach to bring hybrid's to the car market. I am very familiar with the GM/Allison Hybrid system and can tell you first hand when this system comes out next year in the SUV, and I believe there is a midsize car coming at the same time, it will kick the competion were it hurts. The fuel economy and the power will amaze you.

To Tom W (March 25th)

It would be phenomenal if any auto company could figure out how to run a car without gasoline.

How’s this for a thought? Let’s try to run cars on salt water! Three-quarters of this earth is covered in it and it’s omnipresent.

Something that may or may not happen in our lifetime.

In today’s instantaneous news environment, what is new today is old tomorrow. Unfortunately, not everything can be done in “blur” time.

There’s a lot of opportunity out there for everyone. And I still believe GM has the capability and the capacity to implement extraordinary breakthroughs.

It’s just a question of “turning-around” in time, and that time must be NOW.

TurnAround. Just simply, TurnAround.

Ethel O

Maybe GM hasn't jumped head-first into the deceptively "greener" hybrid bandwagon because of what they learned from their all-electric car pilot program from the 90's. Any fuel savings from the purchase of a hybrid will be eaten up by the initial higher cost, and the inevitable cost of replacing the massive battery pack. Then there's the environmental impact of disposing of the battery, even after any possible reclamation of the battery components. Having once worked at a battery plant, I can tell you there are few things with more toxic components than a battery. At the moment a tax benefit helps atificially offset the costs, but that won't last. Hydrogen would be much cleaner, but the creation of hydrogen has to be made more efficient before the net pollutants will make it worthwhile. See how happy the Toyota hybrid owners are when it comes to battery replacement time !

Kyle,

Your response, and the response of many on this blog are indicative of the short-sightedness that is currently plaguing GM.

This was an opportunity where the right PR approach could be like marketing-judo. Turn Toyota's press coverage against them by getting out the good GM information fast enough that every article about Lexus has a comment that GM has had similar systems for years.

Instead, GM posts this snarky crud.

I see some people still haven’t gotten the word. The OLD studies on the energy cost of ethanol production were very flawed, and incorrect. The newer studies show ethanol production (including all planting, harvesting, fertilizing, and transporting costs) still being a net GAIN in energy. And even if this weren’t the case, the issue is reducing OIL consumption. If we produce and burn ethanol instead of oil (which, you may have heard, comes from some areas of the world where they don’t particularly like us) we will be in control of our own fuel supplies. Even if it costs more.

But yes, certainly, ethanol is currently more expensive than gasoline. But you may have noticed that the cost of oil continues to go up, because there’s only so much oil existing on this planet, and nobody’s making any more. The cost of ethanol, which is renewable, and expandable, will certainly go down once production expands to meet demand.

And all those ethanol costs are based on corn production, because we already have the ability to scale up our current production of the common corn crop, and convert it cheaply to ethanol. But we can (and most certainly will) find a more efficient crop to cultivate, just as Brazil decided on sugar cane for their ethanol production program.

And any competent physicist will tell you the SUV is the best choice to make truly serious fuel-efficiency improvements. Doubling a truck’s gas mileage saves more gas than doubling an economy car’s gas mileage. And a truck has a lot more room to improve it’s efficiency.

A hybrid/ethanol vehicle would be a nice start, but hybrids work best on the large, heavy, and slow vehicles driving short trips with lots of starts and stops. (Think UPS truck – the perfect use for a hybrid) Hybrids give NO improvement, and sometimes even poorer mileage, when you use them in an aerodynamic (Freeway) capacity. A hybrid’s efficiency comes from it’s ability to not use any energy (shuts off the gas engine) while coasting, or while the vehicle is stopped, whereas an idling Internal Combustion Engine burns fuel even when it is doing no work.

The utility (or lack of) of the Prius and Insight type vehicles severely limits them. Most of the people I know have families to transport, trailers to pull, cargo to haul. That’s why the market moved to trucks instead of cars. The cars became “less capable” (mainly due to government requirements for safety, emissions, and fuel mileage), but people still needed, or just wanted, to be able to do real work with their vehicle.

From GM's own website GMability...

"At GM, we've launched a hybrid program that is focused on the highest-fuel-consuming vehicles such as mass transit buses, full-size trucks and SUVs. We are helping to preserve the environment, one city at a time."

This strategy makes the most sense. Fuel consumption (in gallons per mile) is more telling than the traditional "miles per gallon" rating that Americans typically refer to.

Squeezing extra mileage out of a small car has only a minimal impact on consumption, however making similar MPG improvements in a large vehicles can dramatically reduce consumption.

Here's an example: Increasing a trucks's mileage from 15 to 20 mpg will yield the same reduction in consumption as increasing a car's mileage from 30 to 60 mpg.

GM's strategy will do far more to reduce America's energy dependancy than Toyota's dabbling in gas-sipping econoboxes.

I'd really like to see GM explain their strategy in terms like this. So many math-challenged Americans need a quick lesson in mileage versus consumption. It would go a long way to educating the public regarding GM's strategy for reducing energy consumption.

This blog is getting really boring. How about talking about products that people really care about. I would like to hear about future products, not about some hybrid tecnology that you are only gonna sell a few thousand of (if you're lucky). I don't care about some auto show overseas. I care about what is going on here in America, here in Detroit. Give us a taste of the products in the pipeline that you think will turn things around. To be honest, if you people don't get some exciting new products to market soon, it won't matter how many jobs you cut or plants you close. I understand that you have to pear your workforce down to meet demand, but I'm afraid that the demand won't be there at all, especially with $3 a gallon gas and the only new products worth having from GM are full size trucks and SUVs. I am a supporter of GM and I hope you turn things around. So far, I don't see anything to indicate that will happen.

I don't think hybrids are the answer for the passenger car - yet.

Show me some engineering. Give me a diesel engine. Give me a car that utilizes carbon fiber to cut weight - then you can cut power, use less fuel, and hold performance levels.

The real trick would be to convince people that they don't need full size trucks and suv's to commute to work each day.

Maybe these vehicles could be rented on a large scale directly from GM so when you needed to tow that boat for the weekend, the superbly maintained truck is ready and waiting at your Chevy dealer?

And then maybe we could get the public to ride those hybrid buses. :-)

Someone mentions getting the stock price up even if it means a takeover.

This is the self serving attitude and impatient, one sided thinking that is driving GM into the dirt.

Steve M.,

Your post misses the point. Toyota has been making questionable claims, not just on hybrids.

Toyota had to revise horsepower downward for 2006. The media practically covered up for them:

http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060313/AUTO01/603130350

The media treats the Toyota oil sludge contraversy with kid gloves. Petition online still gets signatures. It happens at the local level.

http://www.petitiononline.com/TMC2003/petition.html

Toyota receives plenty of complaints at the NHTSA.

Some 75,000 Toyota prius hybrids were reportedly recalled. Some of the same media said very little.

The public mostly learned about E85 from GM, not from the media.

The media hasn't given GM fair coverage on hybrids. The coverage often high lights Japanes brands, and seems to mention GM as a footnote, when GM was a pioneer. GM also featured the most powerful fuel cell stack, the media under reported it.

GM leads in class fuel economy in many segments. GM has the most fuel efficient V-6 and V-8. The media underreport it.

When GM has positive promotions, the other side employs guerilla marketing tactics against GM and its promotions.

In some forums run by those with an import attitude, GM enthusiasts posts are deleted and archived when positive facts about GM are given and when counterpoints are made.

After 9/11, GM kept America rolling with zero percent campaign which was attacked by the other side. And when the stock market dropped, Congress failed to support American companies when pension and benefit funds suffered. Yet American companies supported the US.

Everyday Americans are furious at Congress over trade policy stacked against American business. Elitists have a clear agenda with a constant drum beat against American business.

GM sells more of the vehicles people want. When Cadillac reported it was the top seller of vehicles over 40K, a truer test of luxury, the media selectively reported it. Cadillac had more models on the 2005 best selling top ten luxury vehicles than any other brand. Cadillac sales sold at higher prices than the foreign competition. When Toyota tried to include subsidiary Diahatsu in its annual sales figures, the media bought it hook line and sinker.

The American media underreported the Japanese Banking crisis and virtually ignored facts linking it to Toyota's bank, the UFJ, which was one of the worst with Toyota's Chairman on the board.

The media brushed aside Wall Steets fumbling and failure to uncover the accounting scandals. And somehow these Wall Steet tycoons are considered experts on the US auto industry?

GM leads the business world in integrity.

The media routinely excludes GM's foreign owned brands from its reports on sales, but lets Toyota include them as in the case of Diahatsu.

When GM cancelled production of the Camaro, many felt they would plan another one, yet the media over-reported the cancellation without speculation of a return. When Japanese companies cancel a model, the media pays no attention.

Toyota has stand by workers, Toyota has plants in the third world that pay very low wages. Toyota pays high salaries in Japan. Toyota takes masses of profit out of the US. The media mostly ignores it.

GM leads in philanthropy. The media under-reports GM's billions to philanthropy like the PACE awards, and overstates Toyota's millions.

The American media let Toyota get away with condescending remarks that it would raise price to "help" it's US competition, when Toyota's are already overpriced. Toyota offers plain looking, overpriced, ordinary cars. A Lexus amounts to a tarted up Toyota. And very few actually buy Lexus top end vehicles. Not as many people are willing to pay 40+ thousand for a tarted up Toyota.

GM offers better value, distinctive stylish vehicles that people want.

About hybrid batteries: there seems to be a lot of hype presented here about how hybrid batteries will need replacement soon and how the owners of those presumably-Japanese cars will be regretting their initial purchases.

Does anyone have any links to hard data on the web showing this? The only stuff I've seen so far indicates that the first 2 years' production models had a higher rate of needing battery pack replacement. Apparently better battery management systems make all the difference. There are quite a few making it into the 200K+ mile range on the original battery packs.

Links please? My mad Googling skillz aren't finding anything yet.

"We respect Toyota's technical capability"

What you ought to be respecting is Toyota's ability to deliver compelling products that people want to buy again and again. Who was first with what doesn't really matter when Toyota has 30 years of growing market share, stellar quality reports, and steady profitability to GM's 30 years of shrinkage, marginal quality, and periodically staggering losses.

In Sports Car's magazine's latest issue, they end their review of the Solstice with a diatribe against the 'mean spirited half-assedness' of GM's product development. This is the _perfect_ description of most recent GM products. Just as a trivially small example, my wife and I are shopping for a 'baby mobile' for our growing family. The closest GM product that fits our needs is a Buick Rendezvous. One of the first things I noticed about the Rendezvous was the steering wheel: it's leather wrapped, but only at the extreme top and bottom. The area around the spokes is the usual plastic. I can only assume that this is done to save on costs: wrapping leather around the spokes is probably pretty time consuming and expensive. The problem is that this is on a $28K Buick... my $15K Nissan Sentra SE has a wonderful, fully leather wrapped, steering wheel. So did my 1997 Cherokee and 2001 BMW Z3. (The 1997 Regal GS I looked at when shopping for the Cherokee had the same half wrapped designn as the Rendezvous.)

Now, this is a small, small thing, but I need to trust this vehicle with my newborn child (there is nothing more important), as well as hopefully actually want to part with $30K to buy the vehicle. This lousy attempt to save money ends up undermining both of those goals, and is something GM has been doing for years.

Anyway, we have it narrowed down to a Toyota RAV4 V6 or a Honda CR-V. I think we'll be happy with either choice. :-)

Being "first to market" doesn't matter with ANY product.

Microsoft didn't invent any of the products and services they provide. They just improved on what was already out there, and now they "own" the market.

Starbucks didn't invent coffee, or coffee houses, but now there is a new Starbucks opening every time you turn around.

McDonald's didn't invent hamburgers, Coca-Cola didn't invent cola, and Toyota didn't invent hybrids of any kind.

These companies just made the best products they could, and the customers beat a path to their door.

If GM wants to lead, they can't do it by marketing. Just pick a market segment, and make the best possible product for that market. You will notice that the Corvette has the least marketing of any GM vehicle. A great product doesn't need marketing. And a bad product is a waste of marketing.

Definition of snarky crud -- Toyota Prius marketing hype. Unfortunately for the ill informed buyer it doesn't get better gas mileage, doesn't save the earth's resources but does cost about $10,000 more than for something comparable. Also its frequent breakdowns and software glitches are thrown in for free. Thankfully, it wasn’t a GM car or otherwise the media would have gone nuts. Toyota gets another walk.

Here is another consideration for adopting hybrid or any new technology;

Have your customers HELP you.

Your now defunct EV1 program was a step in this direction. The problem was wrong car for wrong time.

But let us say you did a pilot production run of a particular product, and either through a qualifying dealer (ugh) or one of your regional service/training centers, lease these products to customers for a year. Make the lease reasonable, require the customer to provide regular feedback (by internet or phone), and to bring the vehicle in on a monthly basis for checkup and possible modifications.

What would you get? Invaluable product feedback.
More Customer loyality ("wow, they're actually INTERESTED in me!").
Useful publicity.

As a former GM Engineer, I remember GM asked us to test out new cars from time to time, but a few engineers are too small a basis to fully evaluate a product. Software companies understand this - the beta programs I'm on routinely have hundreds of testers, whose feedback helps polish the product and makes sure it will do what its market wants.

Finally, hold regional clinics that GM customers can attend to chat with experts, get some tweaks to the products, and give you invaluable feedback.

How about it, GM? How about asking us for help and our participation in honing your new stuff?

Company PR hacks often have selected memories or limited knowledge. Like journalists (many have done both jobs) they often write what they believe, not what is actually true.

When Daewoo introduced it's XK-series straight six in the Magnus they claimed it was the first in a transverse application, ignoring Volvo's S80.

When Mercedes announced their new 3.5 L DOHC V6, they claimed it was the first with dual-VVT (previously only on straight sixes), ignoring the GM 3.6 L and later Toyota 2.5 and 3.0 V6s with Dual-VVT already on the market.

A longitudinal CVT? Toyota doesn't offer one at all, and if they did it would not be the first. Nissan transmission subsidiary JATCO builds toroidal CVT transmissions for rwd vehicles such as the Skyline (G35 in the US).

As for the GS450h, it's not the first CAR with a longitudinal hybrid transmission. It's not even the first TOYOTA. An older-generation Crown sedan (the vehicle the GS-series is traditionally based on) was offered with a mild hybrid transmission until recently.

Peter R:

Good points! I like your idea about making vehicles of lighter materials so as to reduce the size of the "energy footprint" required. There are a very few aluminum- and plastic-bodied cars on the road today. The Honda Insight is one that comes to mind as being both lighter-weight and a hybrid as well. I'm still looking for good data on the longevity of hybrid battery packs. Does anyone have any good links?

I totally agree on the necessity of convincing people that SUVs aren't needed to haul just one person, the driver, for his or her daily commute, especially when the route is paved roadway at moderate grades, with the surfaces kept clean.

Someone at GM should be happy, I suppose, that the parking lot at the place where I work is 75% SUVs, all of which spend 90% or more of their time with just one person on board, the driver. None of them are used for off-roading. One of them (a Suburban) sometimes tows a boat in the summertimes, but otherwise it's a single-person vehicle almost all year long.

Our good friends at OPEC must be elbowing each other and snickering every time they hear of such wastefulness.

Mind you, I don't deny that vehicles like the Suburban are the perfect choice for certain tasks; they're just not the most efficient way to move one person from point A to B. Unfortunately, a higher incidence of inefficient usage is merely going to raise everyone's fuel prices to the point where other choices become appealing. I think we're at that point already, which is why it pains me to see GM not offering small, fuel-efficient cars for folks who want them. I'd be driving a GM product today if they made something that fit the bill.

Littlebug.You give a report that is old and flawed.Recent reports state that Ethanol is indeed a net energy maker.They said the same things about tar sands in Canada which contain about 1.6 trillion barrels of oil.Yet companies have flocked over there in one of the biggest oil booms yet.We can create a boom over here threw our crop land.Brazil has between 60 and 70% of its cars running on Ethanol we can do the same or better.I am not against Hybrids but with its now known fuel MPG greatly overstated,plus a added expence for the option,plus to replace the batteries(Honda Insight $3600)plus enviromental costs in disposing of the batteries.It still has away to go.By all means GM should be looking at this technology very hard.I just dont like the fact that the MPG were way off.Ethanol is a clean burning fuel that creates jobs here and like Hybrids we can only get better at it threw time.We need to focus on the technology of this BIG TIME.We need a Moon Shot like project from goverment and the private sector.

Mr. Stephens: I would like to see GM build the ultimate Hybrid. Granted it won’t get 50 MPG, but it will have mass market appeal and for buyers who need 6 plus seating capacity it will be their “Ultimate Hybrid”.

Hybrid Model 55-57 Retro-modern styled Bel-Air with 5.3L E-85 Hybrid Drive-train from Tahoe – Optional AWD

This would be a full line of 2 Door HARDTOP, 4 door sedan, Convertible with retractable hardtop, Nomad wagon with “Quad Coupe” style rear doors and even El Camino versions in both 2 and 4 door (with “Quad Coupe” doors). Add the option of AWD and start cranking them out. This combination would be able to get 30-35 MPG highway if AFM and 6-speed automatic were added. (Great style and MPG with V-8 power – what’s not to like)

Later, a true SS 396 (6.5L) derivative of the 2007 Escalade aluminum 4.06 bore block with a new forged steel 3.83 stroke crank. This would truly be a knockout, AFM and 3-valve heads would generate 500 HP with 525 Ft/lbs of torque and be capable of 30 MPG highway with a 6-speed paddle shift automatic.

The new GMT900 platform could be used for this car line-up which would greatly reduce cost and time to market. GM would stun the auto industry with this one and with great visibility, high “H” point, ease of entry/exit and trunk capacity. And yes a 6-passenger model complete with overstuffed bench seats would be offered, trust me you will be very surprised how many customers would buy one just for the seats. The excellent 6 and 10 way buckets offered on the GMT900 with a large console/center seat for the front center position and the 5 passenger bucket and full length console optional.

A Sedan Delivery “Tall Wagon” could be offered with an 8-passenger model with 10-way buckets and console/center seats in the front and second row with a pair of 10-way buckets and console at the rear. With a hybrid drive and DVD entertainment you would have the ultimate car pool vehicle – especially the AWD version.

The legendary 409 (6.7) would be re-created using the 3.83 stroke in the Z06 7.0L (4.125 bore block). Optional AWD would allow all of the power available to result in acceleration and deliver incredible cornering performance.

For buyers looking for maximum MPG a 300 HP 4.2L I-6 E-85 with AFM coupled to the proven Hybrid 6-speed drive maybe capable of 40 MPG Highway

This is a timetable that would gain GM some market:

2008 Detroit Auto show introduce PRODUCTION ’55 retro-modern style 4-Door Sedan along side 2-Door Hardtop prototype for summer launch.

2008 Chicago Auto Show introduce the El Camino versions

2008 NY Auto show introduce the Nomad

2008 LA Show introduce the by now demanded Convertible model.

2009 Detroit Auto Show introduction of Sedan Delivery Model
And
396 SS for spring introduction.

A twist of conventional styling runs for maximum architecture payback would be a revolving ’55, ’56, then ’57 style vehicles running for 9 years as follow:

2008: ’55 style 4 Door, ’55 2 Door Hardtop, ’55 El Camino and Nomad

2009: ’56 style Hard Top Convertible and Sedan Delivery
4.2L I-6 Hybrid added with ’56 styling

2010: ’57 Convertible in Soft top version complementing hard top model
Return of the SS 396

2011: ’55 style returns in all models
Shake things up with ’61 or ’62 Biscayne style “Bubble Top” 409

2012: ’56 style returns in all models
Introduce ’61 or ’62 style “Sport Roof – looked like a convertible top”

2013: ‘57 style returns in all models
Produce a “Real” ’61 or ’62 style Hardtop Convertible

2014: ’55 style returns in all models
Introduce ’61 or ’62 style Sport Wagon

2015: ’56 style returns in all models
Shake things up again with ’69 Chevelle style lineup

2016: ’57 style returns in all models
Introduce next generation of alternating style with ’70 Chevelle lineup

2017: Best selling of the ’55-’57 or ’61-’62 style returns in all models
Introduce last of new alternating style with ’70 Monte Carlo lineup

This is a quick overview and obviously not all models noted will be made, and thanks again for listening.

as already stated before, HYBRID TECHNOLOGY ON SPECIALTY CARS AND ECONOMY CARS IS A MUTE POINT! who cares really except the media and supposed greenie types who dont know their facts or are on a "feel good" trip.

eeking 40+ miles per gallon out of a car that already gets 38+ is NOT a break through! getting a big 4500+ lbs truck, sport ute, or even a frivolous sports car to be 35-50% more efficient while still performing in a comparable manner to it's pears is something! GM is killing me by having such a terrible PR and Marketing department. but they have the right focus.

nobody is going to give up the power versatillty and size of the american sport ute or truck. at least not willingly. so focus on what the consumer really wants and leave all of the "feel good" "hey look at me i care" and "i'm making a statement" bull at the door.

anyone who does their research knows that all of the well touted hybrids out there cost more to purchase, own ,and compare not too favorably to their conventinal peers. THEY ARE ABOUT PERCEPTION, NOT REALITY. the company LOOKS good, the consumer FEELS good and the problem still remains.

when a hybrid comes out that has the power, performance, usefullness, and price that the "average" real world car, truck, or sport ute posseses then i'll take hybrids serious. till then, they might as well be 'hydra cars' or 'areo cars' for all i care.

Merrill - Name a car the size of the Prius that gets better gas milage and has lower emissions ?

I thought so.

I read these pages to see if anything is changing, but I don't see it. I'm interested because I'd like to see GM succeed, but they have to convince me because I've owned 6 GM vehicles and as a result I'm their worst nightmare - a former customer that needs convincing that they can build reliable well engineered vehicles. To do that they need inovative products that they can guarantee. They should be willing to warantee them for at least as long as the payments last. They appear to be unable to do that. I know that toyota, honda and nissan only provide 3/36 while lexus/acura/infiniti provide 4/48 but the ones I've owned you only change the do the routine maintance and nothing breaks. That certainly was never my experience with GM products that include corvette, camaro z-28, astro, impala and silverado. It seems simple keem the product fresh, build them right and guarantee them and the customers will return. Don't follow those simple items and I hate to think what the result will be.

Speaking of gas milage; your list of 30 mpg+ vehicles does not include the 6-speed Corvette. Why not? My 99 hardtop with 70k miles is still getting 31 to 33 mpg on the hiway. Our trip from Las Vegas to Indiana averaged 31.9

Tim, my point is as follows –Toyota is an arrogant company that lies to their customers. The Prius has been pitched to get 50 to 60 miles per gallon. If you accept this premise, then I would be unable to provide you with an example of a car that beats it. But realty and facts being what they are, this car gets somewhere between 35 and 45 miles per gallon when it is running properly. There are cars in the market that can match this and costs less or for same price are better cars.

Solomon Technologies, Inc.: ITC Institutes Investigation of Toyota

Distribution Source : PrimeZone Media Network

Date : Wednesday, February 08, 2006

"TARPON SPRINGS, Fla., Feb. 8, 2006 (PRIMEZONE) -- Solomon Technologies, Inc. (OTCBB:SOLM) announced today that it has been notified that the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) in Washington, D.C. has instituted an investigation based on the complaint that Solomon filed against Toyota Motor Corporation (NYSE:TM) and certain affiliates. The ITC acts as an administrative investigative body to determine, among other things, whether or not goods imported into the United States infringe U.S. patents.

Solomon President Peter W. DeVecchis, Jr., said, "The investigation by the ITC is an important next step in our continuing prosecution of the infringement by Toyota. As I have noted previously, we believe that the ITC's streamlined administrative process, as well as the technical depth of the ITC staff, will be helpful in expediting and supporting our claims." He continued, "With this news, we are intensifying our efforts to protect our intellectual property to the fullest extent possible."
ADVERTISEMENT

As previously announced, Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. has agreed to represent Solomon in its pending claims against Toyota. Solomon brought suit against Toyota Motor Corporation, Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. Inc. and Toyota Motor Manufacturing North America in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division, on September 12, 2005, claiming infringement of a number of claims in Solomon's U.S. Patent Number 5,067,932, primarily relating to Toyota's use of the technology in its Prius and Highlander Hybrid vehicles. On January 11, 2006, Solomon filed an additional complaint against Toyota with the United States International Trade Commission seeking to exclude importation of the infringing technology.

If Solomon is successful in its ITC action, Toyota could be prohibited from importing into the United States infringing combination motor and transmission systems and those products containing such systems, including the Toyota Prius and Highlander models. "

Some of the comments criticize GM for setting the record straight to the press on GM bringing out the first rear wheel drive hybrids. It seems GM did this in a matter of fact and tactful way. There is certainly nothing wrong to claiming credit if credit is due you.

If any company can be criticized for its public relations it is Toyota. Toyota’s “What if a company” campaign is patronizing nauseating. I wish all auto companies would advertise the virtues of their automobiles and not how great a corporate citizen they are and how lucky we are to have them around.

GM may have had the first Rear wheel drive hybrids on the market, but there are other areas that they claim to be first but in reality they are also the second or third. I just wanted to point out that the new 2007 Escalade is not the first production vehicle to offer 22" wheels, The advertising department must have forgotten about the Dodge Ram SRT-10, both 2 and 4 door versions offer 22" wheels as standard equiptment.

Twenty five years ago I owned a Plymouth Champ. It was a re-badged Mitsubishi that easily got 50 mpg at 50 mph on clam days. Give me a tail wind and look out baby. Around town mileage was in the mid 30’s. It had a 1.4L normally aspirated engine.

Today there is no non-hybrid vehicle available in the US that gets that type of mileage. Why, after 25 years of computer controlled technical advances, lighter materials and aerodynamic designs, have we not developed small 75 to 100 mpg vehicles?

On the subject of GM’s perception problem getting “hit on” through the PR sector –

I’ll agree that some journalists and marketing personnel have been involved in the PR arena as well, but for them to do their job to the best of their ability, they either have to have the knowledge or must do the research and verify that the information obtained through their research is accurate before using that information for making claims to the public.

That chore of validating veritable facts becomes a more formidable task in today’s internet “blogosphere” and breaking news casts. And we all know (from prior news release blunders), what some “inaccurate information” used in breaking news casts has done to some people’s careers. And let’s not forget that today’s bloggers hold that same power with their opinion in affecting the public’s perception about a company.

GM has many issues right now front and center in the media almost every day with little let up on media coverage – whether the commentary is good or bad.

At the “Fork In the Road” GM is at now, (and even if they were not at such a critical juncture), I highly doubt that the PR or marketing department would risk sending fallacious messages to the public.

Who’s first and who’s right doesn’t really matter as long as the message being delivered is as truthful as possible based upon the supporting information at that time. And most importantly, the customer must also perceive that the message about the product is accurate.

Think about my remarks relative to the late Howard Cosell. Here’s a guy who changed his profession, changed his name, wore that famous toupee, and will be remembered for his quote, “Tell It Like It Is.”

I think GM is trying to do the same thing, The “believe-ability” factor is what’s absent here. GM just needs to articulate their message to the car buyer about their vehicles a hell of a lot better.

Very simply, just TurnAround when formulating that message. There are three roads in the fork; not two. Pick up that eating utensil and take a good look at it.

Take the third (alternative) road here and drive like hell on it! Hang in there! TurnAround.

Ethel O

Hi Tom,

With all due respect, stop fixating on the minutae in Toyota's PR hyberbole. To the average consumer, it is not relevant in the least. Put a mainstream hybrid on the road and do it soon. That is the path back to respect for GM's hybrid prgrams, not quarelling about the real wheel drive details about GM's present accomplishments. And please, 450 buses is great, but that does move the total needle on this country's dependance on petrolium.

Mr. Stephens: Looks like GM beat everyone to the E-85 Hybrid with the announcement of the 9-3 Convertible BioPower Hybrid concept that can use E-85 or 100% Ethanol (E-100), making it the first “Fossil Fuel-Free Hybrid”. And when burning E-100 produces no Fossil Fuel Emissions and is capable of 0-60 times of under 6.9 seconds.

When will the production version be available and what kind of real world MPG can it deliver?

The BioPower Hybrid system should be used across the SAAB car lineup; the ability to run on 100% Bio-Ethanol with 0 emissions would give GM a lead in the Hybrid market since Bio-Ethanol has no petroleum in it. Even running E-85 greatly reduces petroleum requirements and CO2 emissions for this car. It can run on electric power alone in a “Zero Mode” with limited range producing no emissions.

The SAAB 9-2x will probably be out of production or replaced with a model that could use this system making SAAB the first mass market car company with an all Hybrid lineup.

This makes sense for GM since SAAB sales are relatively low so that GM can focus on dealer training for selling the Hybrid system and technician training to quickly fix any problems that may surface. It is imperative to get all of the logistics in place for a new model that has all new technology.

Exciting AWD E-85 Turbo Bio-Power, Turbo-Diesel and Hybrids in E-85, E-100 and Turbo-Diesel models would define SAAB as the premier provider of stylish, environmentally friendly designs that are fun to drive with focus on:
Alternative energy (E-85 & Bio-Diesel) Bio-Power
AWD performance
Scandinavian design
Turbo Diesels

SAAB needs to establish the fact it is a Swedish based automaker and emulate Scandinavian design themes. With elegantly clean lines using colors and textures not found in automotive interiors would set SAAB apart from the crowd and attract a young affluent customer base.

With interiors emulating Scandinavian design with clean lines and lighter wood tones. Why not team up with IKEA and offer SAAB vehicles through their stores, a local dealer could deliver it to the store; or directly to the customer’s home. Offer customers the use of a 9-7X, 9-3 Combi, or 9-5 Wagon to take their purchase home with a free 24 hour test drive. Have weekend SAAB test drives in the store parking lots where the customer DOES NOT get a sales pitch but real world exposure to SAAB products.

9-2 – The Astra will be the new architecture used for the 9-2 series and will be offered in 3D and 5D door models based on fixed roof versions of the Twin Top. AFL lighting and Electronic Stability Program (ESP) will be standard with Interactive Driving System (IDS–plus) and Continuous Damping Control (CDC) optional. Standard engine is the 180 HP 1.6L Turbo with 5-speed manual and optional 5-speed Automatic. Optional power would be either 1.9L Turbo-Diesel BioDiesel Hybrid or the 2.0L 260 HP and 292 ft/lb. BioPower Hybrid system with 6-speed manual and optional 6-speed automatic paddle shift.
Models offered (AWD and Hybrid optional on all):
3-Door – Twin Top based with panoramic windscreen and fastback rear hatch
5-Door – Same as 3-door (gives SAAB models completely different look)
Combi (Wagon)
Twin-Top

Sonnet – A Solstice or Corvette based 3-Door coupe with AWD to be announced at the Detroit Auto in 2007. This will be the Aero X production model with the style of the concept except for substituting “Lamborghini Doors” and Panoramic windscreen from the Astra 3-Door GTC in place of the one piece cockpit of the concept. Base engine is the 3.6L Turbo V-6 with 300+ HP with 6-speed manual and paddle shift automatic optional. 5.3L Turbo V8 with 450 HP optional.

Sonnet Hard Top Convertible - extended 107” wheelbase would be the basis for the Hardtop Convertible (9-2 Twin-Top) with Scandinavian designed interior and standard 2.8L Turbo V-6 with 6-speed manual and automatic.

Hybrid models available with either the 1.9L Turbo-Diesel BioDiesel Hybrid or the 2.0L 260 HP and 292 ft/lb. BioPower system with 6-speed manual and optional 6-speed automatic paddle shift.

9-3 – Next generation will offer FWD or AWD and return to the wrap around windshield of the 900 Turbo and will once again be offered in 3 Door and 5 with easy access to the generous cargo capacity; features that made the SAAB 900 Turbo practical performance vehicles. New Scandinavian designed interiors and the convertible will now be offered in a retractable Hard Top design like the Astra Twin Top. Hybrid models available with either the 1.9L Turbo-Diesel BioDiesel Hybrid or the 2.0L 260 HP and 292 ft/lb. BioPower system with 6-speed manual and optional 6-speed automatic paddle shift.

3-Door
4-Door
5-Door
Combi (Wagon)
Twin-Top

9-4X – A Solstice based SUV the size of a BMW X-3 with AWD. Standard engine is the 2.8L Turbo V6 and optional 4.4L Turbo V8 both with 6-speed automatics and optional AWD. Hybrid with 2.8L Turbo based BioPower Hybrid system.

9-5 - Top line model patterned after Oldsmobile Aurora, this was a great car and with similar style and standard 2.8L Turbo V6 and optional 4.8L Turbo V8 both with 6-speed automatics and optional AWD.

Hybrid with 2.8L Turbo based BioPower Hybrid system.

9-6X – Based on the Enclave it will be a hit, only thing to add is optional 5.3L AFM model (9-8X).

9-6T – Based on the 9-6X a “Europe Only” crew-cab pickup to compete with Honda Ridgeline except it would offer 5.3L AFM V8 as an option (9-8T).

9-6V – Based on new Enclave this will be a “Europe Only” minivan. The minivan market is starting to make a comeback and GM needs a viable competitor. Standard engine is the 3.6L V6 and optional 5.3 AFM V8 (9.8V) from Impala SS with available AWD models.

Hybrid models of the 9-6X, 9-6T and 9.6V will be 270 HP 2.8L V6 Turbo based BioPower Hybrid system.

Hybrid models of the 9-8X, 9-8T and 9.8V will be 350 HP 4.8L V8 Turbo based BioPower Hybrid system.

9-7X – Same as existing (if not dropped) new Tahoe 5.3L AFM and Hybrid system optional.

SAAB could have a diverse and competitive lineup with Hybrid power optional on all models. Thanks again for asking and I hope some of these make production.

Marc,

“450 buses is great, but that does (not) move the total needle on this country's dependance on petrolium.”

450 hybrid buses saves more fuel than 5,000 hybrid Priuses. That is precisely the kind of thing we need to “move the needle” on our dependence on petroleum.

when will gm come out with a small diesel for the canyon colorado or even the small crossover models? even a smaller duramax for the full size would be nice.

So GM wouldn't mind if nobody bought any more cars and everybody took the bus? Because that's kinda my vision as well.

Tom Stephens,

You absolutely did the right thing. Case in point, the media printed a retraction upon review of the facts. Well done. Rest assured that had your position been reversed and you had made a claim that should actually have been Toyota's the mass media would have crucified you in short order.

People respect people who stand up for themselves. It is way past time for GM to start standing up for themselves. People forget that the media has grown so accustomed to picking on GM with impunity that a major network thought nothing of strapping explosives to a GM car then blowing it up all while claiming that the car had spontaneously combusted all by itself. That's the kind of "objective" media environment that GM now operates in.

Along with Lori Queen rightfully defending GM against Consumer Reports' slanted "surveys", good job Tom Stephens. Good job.

Kyle, again, if you read what I wrote, it all depends whether or not someone considers the Silverado Hybrid as an actual hybrid. In a rigid sense, a hybrid vehicle means that there are two sources of propulsion. The Silverado Hybrid is not universally considered as a hybrid, so it depends on the interpretation.

The CVT comment may not have been mentioned in the Haiwain press event, but it was mention in other press releases by Toyota, namely in Japan.

Toyota officially says that the L110 is the "world's first longitudinal CVT". Now if we're talking about mass-produced vehicles, that is certainly true.

Just as you are picking on Toyota for a technicality, Toyota may have simply misworded, or not completely stated everything explicitly.

Again, depending on interpretation, Toyota's comments can hold true. This is how silly this technicality really is.

Again, look at words used in Toyota's PR. For example, "especially designed". The Silverado's hybrid system, if you can even call it a "hybrid" system, was not "specifically designed" for RWD vehicles. What Toyota's PR could mean is that the entire hybrid system was specifically designed around a longitudinally mounted engine, and a longitudinal CVT developed for a RWD vehicle. So just as you believe they are wrong based on a technicality, they may also be right based on a technicality on their part.

I hope you feel proud in nitpicking a token press release from Toyota, because many of GM's press releases also have technicalities and can be nitpicked to make GM execs look like fools. But none of GM's competition does that, as far as I can tell.

Yes, the Coaster Bus was a series, not parallel hybrid. Yet again, another technicality.

The fact that you mention the Mercedes OE 302 is simply picking at straws. That was an experimental bus. In the same fashion, I could mention Toyota's experimental turbine hybrids dating back to the 70s and 80s. I could also mention the production diesel hybrid Hino trucks that were sold in Japan since the 1990s. The Prius was experimental in the mid 90s, and right now, Toyota has experimental fuel cell hybrid buses testing and undergoing real world trials in Japan. But to mention all this would be going off on different tangents, and way off base of the original discussion.

Andrew Charles, the Crown (mild) hybrid to my knowledge, correct me if I'm wrong, does not use a longitudinal CVT.

Besides, the GM hybrid buses, and the Mercedes Experimental bus, from what I understand, have transversely mounted engines. If Toyota was specifically referring to longitudinally mounted engines, then again Toyota may be right, on a technicality, just as you believe they are wrong on a technicality.

With all the hype about Toyota making it into the 2nd spot of the big three. Let me say this, that Toyota only builds 1 platform and the rest of the production is purchased from GM. Doesn't anyone pay attention to who helps all the other automakers to keep the competition going? In 1995 I worked on dies being built for the GM EV1 platform which is the electric car platform. This car would eat a corvette off the line hands down, and for all those who buy micro cars and dump mass amounts of money into motor mods well look at the GM E85 2.2L 4cyl. On E85 fuel it pumps out 540HP and 400Ft. Lbs of torque not to mention it's naturally aspirated and it's a push rod design and most people today wouldn't know how to drive a push rod designed engine. I like my GM truck and until the other competition can build a true square block I will stick with my GM.

So would you ride lexus or ford when it's a hybrid..??I wouldn't ride GM even it's not a hybrid car.Being the first is easy,but staying the best is the hard part.Think people.we are in a 21century market this is not a toy market GM!!