Gas Prices: Who's to Blame?

[classicman]

Who cares if GM sucks - we all got that and knew it long before you ever posted anything, tw. Is there someone here defending GM products? You seem to be arguing with yourself.

At this point all I see is

[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

You are going to have to take your engineer's blinders off and try to understand the world around you is a world full of humans, not machines. Your ideas on technology and products may be correct 90% of the time but you miss the bigger picture 99% of the time.

You are saying exactly what those GM executives said in the 1960s - nobody wants front wheel drive. You are saying exactly what those GM executives said after DeLorean put a 5 speed in some 1975 Chevy's. GM said nobody wants five speeds and removed the technology in 1977. You are saying exactly what GM executives said about fuel injection and electronics ignition. Then it was finally demanded by government regulation. GM executives said nobody wants headlights and wipers controlled from the steering column. Then it was standard on what were then superior foreign products. GM executives said nobody wanted rack and pinion steering. So superior foreign products had it 20 years before GM finally reduced their manufacturing costs by also using rack and pinion. GM says nobody wants overhead cams - just another reason why GM engines costs more to build and require two extra pistons. GM said nobody wanted reclining seats. Finally I seen too much as did so many friends once I kept exposing these GM crap products. What happened? Every above item was strongly demanded AND eventually appeared on competition products. Costing controlling created diminishing market share from over 50% to the hard core 25%. Oh. One quarter of those GM sales are not to employees and employees of their suppliers - at discount. Only people all but required to buy a GM product are maintaining sales of cars that don't have what people really want.

Yes, 28% of American also believes George Jr is doing a good job. Same minority would also be in denial about GM for same reasons. Surprising – I still hear people say they finally bought a Hyundai,et al four years ago, did not realize how bad their GM products were, and will never go back. IOW GM’s market position will only get worse because even the hard core who will not change are conceding how bad GM products are.

If GM wanted to stop being a reason for high energy prices, GM would have pioneered a superior pickup truck that long ago using the same principles that made GM so industry dominate in the 1950. Well, with moderate gas prices, GM's pickup market has started crashing. What will happen to truck sales when gas prices become high? GM was not innovating 10 years ago. Therefore sales must crash to maybe below 50% now.

Why did GM so dominate the world auto industry in 1957? Because GM was doing innovation that "nobody wanted": including power steering, three speed transmissions, air conditioning, automatic transmissions, rotating valves that eliminated engine failures, multiport carburetors, etc. Later innovation was stifled by people who said we don't want all this stuff. Twenty years later, all this stuff began appearing in products that therefore became America's best selling products. But marketing still says the public does not want all this stuff? Nonsense. That ostrich mentality - marketing geniuses who don't even drive cars - is why gasoline prices increase.

I understand what you say. You are saying why gasoline prices must rise higher. Americans don't like change. Americans hate hybrids. Eventually Toyota et al will pioneer the pickup that GM should have done 10 years ago. Then another part of GM’s market disappears. How many times do we see this before we acknowledge why innovation was really what people wanted. Wall Street is now asking whether GM will go into bankruptcy first.

BTW, same question is being asked of Chrysler whose products also suck and whose fiinancial numbers are less public.

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

Is there someone here defending GM products?

Sycamore who repeatedly praised GM products including his 2008 Cobalt. Numbers say about 25% of us think GM products are great.

And then the question here - why are energy prices so high? As lookout123 notes, a pickup owner will spend $100 on every tank just to appease his ego AND deny that GM products suck.

You may know that GM is the heartattack of America. But do you know why? And why do one in four Americans still disagree with you - including Sycamore?

Why do one in four Americans support the mental midget president AND praise GM products? Why must gasoline prices go higher? Same answer.

[lookout123]

Eventually Toyota et al will pioneer the pickup that GM should have done 10 years ago.

They've probably already done the work that is necessary for it, but they are smart enough to only bring an auto to market when the consumer is ready to buy enough units of the product to achieve profitability.

If you feel that is stupid or unamerican more power to you. you're just one man who is only responsible for your own purchases. until more people agree with you that it is all about the technology, car companies will continue cranking out cars they think people will buy. That usually starts with outward appearance as a top priority. "what do engineers think of my car?" falls pretty low on the list.

[elSicomoro]

I love my Cobalt...it has everything I want, and is perfect for me. And because I love this car while being well-aware of the problems of the maker, I am naive. Could someone explain that one to me?

GM management folks don't have drivers licenses? Tw, do you have a source on that?

1997 Honda Accord 4 cyl 5-spd: 22/29
1996 Honda Accord 4 cyl 5-spd: 22/29
1997 Chevrolet Lumina 6 cyl 4-spd: 18/26
1996 Chevrolet Lumina 6 cyl 4-spd: 18/26

Then let me throw in my previously posted information:

1993 Chevy Cavalier: 26/33
1993 Honda Civic: 35/41
1993 Toyota Corolla: 23/31
1993 Mazda 323: 25/33

All this information is available here. Looks like GM was at least keeping up...unless you believe in the mileage conspiracy that tw mentioned previously. I would believe something like that--25 years ago. Tw also never answered my question about the 40mpg standard that apparently existed in 1993.

For someone that likes to throw around the phrase, "Facts be damned," it seems like tw is acting like management at GM, sticking his fingers in his ears and yelling, "Lalalalalalalala!" I think if we did a scientific study, we would find that 85% of all current Cellar unhappiness has been caused by tw.

Look, Tom, you've already been taken to school at least twice in this thread. Walk away, man. Or at least, come up with some original posting...you're posting retreads that you've probably posted 9 or 10 times before over the past 7 years.

[elSicomoro]

Oh...I forgot to mention that we drove a Ford Edge while out East...I wrote a blog about it yesterday. Check it out!

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by sycamore

you're posting retreads that you've probably posted 9 or 10 times before over the past 7 threads.

fixed

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

Sycamore who repeatedly praised GM products including his 2008 Cobalt. Numbers say about 25% of us think GM products are great.

Therefore 3 out of four agree - now stop it.

Originally Posted by tw

...a pickup owner will spend $100 on every tank just to appease his ego AND deny that GM products suck.

One has nothing to do with the other.

Originally Posted by tw

You may know that GM is the heartattack of America. But do you know why? And why do one in four Americans still disagree with you - including Sycamore?

3 out of four agree with me.

Originally Posted by tw

Why do one in four Americans support the mental midget president AND praise GM products?

Why do 3 out of four disagree with the president and dislike GM products?

Why are you still :

[glatt]

Originally Posted by lookout123

Customers want what they want and they won't let you tell them what they want.

I know what you are trying to say here lookout, but I don't completely agree. If what you are saying is true, then there would be no car advertisements on tv. Advertising works. Car companies routinely change the behavior of consumers by convincing them that they want something that they didn't previously know they wanted.

It doesn't always work for every product. Remember the Aztec? But it does work surprisingly well for most. Consumers usually give more weight to the "image" of a car than most practical concerns when they are buying one, and advertisements are very effective at portraying what the "image" of a car is.

[lookout123]

but they are advertising the image that they feel people want. that is why most auto makers have regional commercials. nearly all of them out here show trucks going through the desert and over rough rocky terrain. outdoor sports. in chicago i've seen the same vehicle be advertised as a sleek in city status symbol.

it would be a tough sell to convince those that like the rough and tumble image of trucks to buy a small, highly fuel efficient, front wheel drive pickup. it will happen eventually, but not until the public is ready for it.

[tw]

Originally Posted by sycamore

I love my Cobalt...it has everything I want, and is perfect for me.

One who only drove Model Ts would love a 2008 Model T. That is the point. You were driving GM products. Therefore any GM product that is only 10 years obsolete would be a major improvement.

1997 Honda Accord 4 cyl 5-spd: 22/29
1996 Honda Accord 4 cyl 5-spd: 22/29
1997 Chevrolet Lumina 6 cyl 4-spd: 18/26
1996 Chevrolet Lumina 6 cyl 4-spd: 18/26

Return to previously posts facts. GM optimizes their vehicles for EPA mileage testing. Ie. Corvette that would change engine parameters and bypass second gear during EPA tests. I never got 26 MPG out of that Pontiac (Lumina equivalent) doing only highway driving. But then no one should have expected GM cars to achieve those EPA numbers. Look at the numbers. These were only 52 HP/liter engines.

EPA numbers for a 1997 Honda were posted. Actual driving numbers for that 5 speed Honda Accord (now more than 10 years old) were 36 and 38 MPG. Why? Hondas are not optimized for EPA mileage testing. Hondas are designed by car guys - the people who innovate. Therefore that Honda EPA rated at only 29 MPG highway routinely does over 30 MPG local AND 36-38 during a trip of nothing but highway driving.

You bragged about a 2008 Cobalt doing 40. A 10 year old Accord - a much heavier and older car - did almost as good because it was not a GM product.

Facts and numbers were posted repeatedly and previous for Sycamore. So again, you post numbers that contradicts what you have posted. The Honda (designed by car guys) is rated only for 29 and did consecutive tanks of 36 and 38 MPG. If I say it enough times, will Sycamore finally understand it? GM products did achieve their EPA highway figures. GM is a major contributor to high oil prices.

Sycamore - welcome to Summer school. You did not learn when these concepts posted month ago. Back when you were praising the poorly regarded (10 year obsolete) GM J-car (or whatever they now call it). This only repeats what Sycamore did not read previously. Energy prices must increase radically. Why? People such as Sycamore would praise GM and buy their crap products. GM - a company that openly advocated low mileage cars - refused to let car guys innovate if not required by government regulation. The US government gave $100million in 1994 to build a hybrid. No hybrid in 2008 and no plans in the innovation pipeline? But Sycamore still praises GM products. Another reason why gas prices must keep increasing. Add Sycamore to the list. He does not even grasp numbers: a patriotic car (now more than 10 years old) rated 29 MPG highway achieved consecutive tanks of 36 to 38 in the real world. GM ran to the government saying this was not possible (just like they did in late 1960s and 1970s).

Ever work in a GM plant. So much of everything. How can GM be worth so little. View GM product designs such as the Cobalt, their pickups, and SUVs. Explains why America consumes twice as much energy per person. It also explains why the American standards of living may be the next victim. Even Sun Microsystems is worth more than GM.

Lessons from the 1970s. Meat prices will double. Massive inflation will finally appear even on spread sheets as jobs are lost. Companies must be sold to foreigners (ie Hershey, Anhauser Busch). Too many would praise and buy GM rather than support free market principles - buy the best. Add Sycamore to a list of why oil prices must increase.

[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

but it would be a tough sell to convince those that like the rough and tumble image of trucks to buy a small, highly fuel efficient, front wheel drive pickup. it will happen eventually, but not until the public is ready for it.

You don't see the word smaller in anything I posted. I have described a truck that is larger, weights massively less, and has a stronger (and longer lasting) drive train. That drive train in pickups today is the weak, low reliability drive train. It's the same 1960 technology that cars no longer use because it fails so often - too many parts - too exposed.

Hear pickups self destructing as they drive down the road. Hear that noise from its exhaust? That's energy being wasted and poorly machined parts vibrating more. Vibrations inside parts cause most wear and damage. Yes, the noise appeals to those with little intelligence - who know it must be better because it makes more noise. But then propaganda can make those types believe anything. Innovative products are first bought by the more intelligent. Notice the increasing market share something recent - Japanese pickups. A Japan clone is superior to a Chevy as the Japan clone mini-van took over that market. Well, it takes time for propaganda to get the easily manipulated to change their thinking. No problem. Toyota, et al will simply do to trucks what they did to cars. More American will end up working for foreigners. All traceable to consumers who encouraged GM to keep making the same pickup based upon a 1930 design with 1960 technology and some of the worlds crappiest drive trains.

Just like in the 1970s - GM, Ford, etc said we cannot improve on cars. They called themselves a smoke stack industry because bean counters cannot innovate. You would suggest GM cannot innovate the truck using the same 'ostrich' reasoning? Innovators always make new markets. Anti-innovators (ie communists) wait for someone else to take those markets away. Same logic also explained why GM, with a 70 Hp/liter engine originally designed in 1972 could not implement that engine even in 2002. Everyone else now uses 70 Hp/liter engines. But not GM. GM said their obsolete technology "was the image that people wanted".

If GM wanted to advance themselves, America, and reduce energy consumption; the pickup would be front wheel drive with all the massive improvement that come from such designs. But GM mentality is to stifle innovation and consume even more fuel. No wonder it takes government regulation to get any innovation out of GM.

[lookout123]

You should definitely create your auto line. And then when you've conquered that you should become a business management consultant and change the way companies are run. After that you absolutely must run for office so you can fix corruption in our political system.

you know everything so you'd be the ideal guy to do it. just as long as real life works like you think it will after reading a few books.

[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

you know everything so you'd be the ideal guy to do it.

All I have done is repost facts and numbers long ago published by others that everyone should know. Nothing new is posted. However it does contradict popular myths. Well, is that not what I do often? See those posts about Saddam's WMDs and reasons for "Mission Accomplished" back in 2003? Who got it right by ignoring popular myths; by instead grasping for facts and numbers? Simply doing same here no matter how unpopular reality may be.

The question is about high gas prices. GM is clearly culpable. Numbers (so often ignored by the local gossip and Fox New propaganda) are posted here. Even Sycamore demonstrates the problem. He posts EPA mileage numbers for equivalent competitive cars - Honda Accord and Chevy Lumina. Even those numbers demonstrate what every one should have known even back then. All I am doing is bluntly attacking popular myths. GM is clearly a major contributor to increasing gas prices with poor products that are also gas hogs and are not exportable.

Why has GMs stock value dropped to 1955 levels? The entire product line is that crappy. And just like throughout the entire 1970s, GM repeatedly stifled innovation while running to government for protection. Want to see GM's problems today. Deja vue. Read DeLorean's book "On a Clear Day You Can See GM".

[Sundae]

Originally Posted by tw

All I have done is repost facts and numbers.... Nothing new is posted... Well, is that not what I do often?... Deja vue.

Okay, snippety snip is unfair. But it's all there