OT: Why General Motors is doomed

[Teamcasa]

" John"

Certainly some buyers think of their machismo when buying however, an overwhelming number of SUV buyers are housewives/working mothers that need to shuttle car loads of kids and gear around. A Prius is simply not up to the task.

As for your attitude regarding HP, it is typical of a left wing environmentalist. The arrogant position that your way of thinking is the only correct one and all others must fall in line - or what - they are stupid, numbskulls that must be taught a lesson? I happen to believe that rational people, given good information, will generally make good choices.

I also find it ironic that the green people are quietly backing away from their historically negative nuclear stance. Only now discovering that last

20+ years for coal/oil/gas burning power plants spew the dreaded C02 gas into our planet's atmosphere. (Forgetting the fact that the human population growth lines up almost exactly with C02 emissions.)

Mike - don't get me wrong, if you want to drive a Civic Hybrid, fine - just come by sometime and I'll be happy to introduce you to one of my salespeople. We also have the Chevrolet Hybrid pickup if you what to protect your green image while still being able to stand and pee.

Dave

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services

---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **

----------------------------------------------------------

[Nobody_special]

*sigh* People who don't understand math and physics shouldn't play with equations.

P=I^2R True.

However I (current) doesn't vary (significantly) with distance. R (Resistance) does.

So doubling the distance would make R-> 2R Resulting in P=I^2*(2R), moving the power loss linearly with distance, not with the square of the distance.

[dpb]

That's a big if, and I, personally, don't...but, whether we in the US do or don't, we're going to be dwarfed very shortly by China and India, anyway...look at the available data on power plant construction in China for example, and that's only what is publicly known easily. Half the guys I know from the construction and operations side are now working in China where they're building as fast as they can get the material and people...

Someone else already noted the fallacy there. The point is, they _are_ being built and in sizable numbers where there is the resource despite the previous post (to which the response was made) that would try to imply a few isolated instances of not building a small number is a general phenomenon. But, like many other options, it isn't universally the best solution nor even feasible everywhere, but it is a very viable option to increase electrical generation.

And while there are some who would/do advocate it, I don't suspect we'll see Lake Mead disappear anytime _real_ soon...

Wrong basis again--the types/varieties of corn grown for ethanol production are specific for the purpose, they aren't grown for human consumption. The amount of production of both soybeans and corn for human consumption is a quite small fraction of present production levels, anyway.

[dpb]

As compared to what? They were essentially identical other GM product lines--that was _the_ major problem, there was no longer anything to differentiate them sufficiently, just as the parallel example w/ Chrysler...

I don't believe the representation of product by factory reps was a bit different in nature w/ Olds than any other GM line (nor Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda or any other manufacturer, for that matter). All make decisions of that type based on their perception of what is the most cost-effective solution for them. I had Olds' from mid-70s thru late

80s and they each lasted for at least 140 kmiles w/ no significant maintenance problems other than one for which I blame myself for using Quaker State, not GM/Olds. I had no more difficulty w/ what little warranty work was required from them than any other distributor I've ever experienced.

Could they have done something different/better? Of course, very few companies (or individuals, for that matter) can say otherwise. Was their demise from "arrogance"? Not in my estimation.

You may disagree, that's your perogative.

[Leon]

No compariwon needed. Year after year, time and time again it became routine to replace the same parts for the same reasons. 10 to 20 times a week for the same part. Many of the replacement parts were stocked in quantities equal to oil filters.

They were essentially identical other GM product

That is nothing new and duplication works for Toyota and Nissan Motor company just fine. Seemed to work well for Apple computers also when they offered different colors. Apple sells the same thing just different variations of appearance. Time and time again factory reps would promice that they were going to get it right this time as new models were being introduced.

Well Good for you. You were lucky. I too drove Oldsmobiles I worked for an Oldsmobile dealer for about 10 years in upper management and had to deal directly with the customers. I assure you the norm was a crappy product by comparison to the Japanese products.

You were not there as the Olds reps would turn down warranty claims because our delaership replaced too many of a certain item. Tell me that is not arrogance. They basically said, we know that there is a problem and we are paying you to make the repairs however you repair more than the Olds dealers in your area so we are going to kick back the claims that put you over the region average.

I don't have to disagree, I know the truth.

[Lew Hodgett]

IMHO, "arrogance" is a term that applied to the entire US auto industry.

Can think of no better example than GM's approach to providing a US diesel engine for Oldsmobiles.

Rather than build a new diesel engine, a new engine program was about $100-$150 million in those days, they chose a short cut.

Mill the head of a 10:1 combustion ratio gasoline engine to achieve a

20:1 ratio required for diesel.

Forget about a new crank, larger bearings, etc, required to handle a higher compression ratio engine.

History has domumented that disaster.

As someone who spent much of my career around heavy industry, (auto, steel, chemical, machine tool, etc) Detroit is heading down that same slippery slope that the steel industry went down a generation earlier.

Those who fail to learn from historical mistakes are doomed to repeat them.

Lew

[Leon]

[Teamcasa]

snip

I too (currently) work at a multi-franchised auto dealer and have done so for 30 years. I watched GM's quality plummet in the 80's while Japan was introducing products. As a dealer for both Honda and Mazda, believe me when I tell you quality was not all that great. Honda's transmission's, brakes and head gaskets were a constant source of our business. Mazda's engines, brakes and transmission contributed as well. The difference between our GM customers and import customers was profound and two-fold.

The typical GM owner rarely had their cars serviced (with us) and when they did, it was just an oil change. OTOH, the import owners bordered on religious about servicing their cars (at the dealership) with us. Secondly, Honda and Mazda stepped up when it came time to fix the known problems, well out of warranty. This became an interesting problem for them. The State started to get complaints about the un-stated warranty. We had to stop saying it was under warranty (past the regular warranty period) and were required to call it dealer good-will.

*Today, the quality difference between the worst built cars Hummer, Jeep, Mazda, VW, Mitsubishi, Land Rover, Saab, Isuzu (mostly imports) and the best, Lexus is very small. With normal maintenance, most any car will outlast your desire to drive it.

The real difference is going to be your relationship with your local dealer and the dealer's relationship with the factory.

Dave

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services

---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **

----------------------------------------------------------

[Michael Daly]

But you use a lot _less_ oil with the battery. They don't make hybrids to burn _more_ fuel.

Mike

[Michael Daly]

Nice to see all those facts you presented. Are you reading the press releases that Ballard puts out that make _predictions_ on what they will have for efficiency someday?

Mike

[Michael Daly]

Just a battery and a fuel cell.

Have you seen the size of fuel cells? 150+kW is big. The 1kW solid oxide fuel cells proposed for extra electric power in cars in the next couple of years is about the size of a briefcase IIRC.

Well, if I get the time, I'll dig out the stats from the transportation engineering courses I took over thirty years ago. Basic conclusion: the info any car buyer gives you is bogus. They don't buy on logic, they buy on ego, image, jonesing and just about anything other than common sense. Lots of studies have been done and the results are depressing - they point to the difficulty in getting people to accept common sense solutions to transportation problems. Worse in the US than in Europe, for example, since the Europeans take to mass transit much more readily.

Yes.

Ummm, hybrids _do_ get better fuel economy, don't they? I first studied hybrid technology over thirty years ago and the numbers that worked for prototypes back then still work today. Costs are better today because of major improvements in battery technology. Hybrids aren't rocket science.

Using a small power plant to provide average capacity and setting some aside for peak demand is a common solution in a number of areas other than cars. Water systems for example - you can lay pipe and build _huge_ pumps to provide peak demand or build a water tower and run a smaller pump at average demand to keep the tank full. The tank + gravity can provide for peak demand.

The only time this doesn't buy you anything is when demand is fairly constant. Hence there is little need for a hybrid locomotive outside of a switching yard. If the train is running on a steady grade at a fairly constant speed, power requirements don't fluctuate much. Ditto a car on a long stretch of highway - that's where the hybrids can barely do better than conventional. My 14 yr old Civic VX gets almost the same highway fuel economy as the new Civic Hybrid (4.5 l/100km vs 4.3). In the city, the Hybrid is way better.

Mike

[Michael Daly]

Compared to?

Look up the definition of battery.

More like $2000. Figure out the cost per kilometer and then compare it to the cost of fuel saved.

Mike

[Michael Daly]

It's their way of attempting to maintain the status quo, without ever having to think.

I don't like the status quo - I know we can do a lot better.

Mike

[Michael Daly]

I see far more SUVs filled with precisely _one_ driver commuting in overloaded highways than SUVs filled with kids.

When I played soccer, we walked or cycled to the field and if it wasn't a home game, the team rented a school bus. The SUV is usually an excuse for a solution looking for a problem. People bought them because they were a fad, not because they were needed. Sales are dropping now because the fad is fading. The almost-a-wagon looks like it may be the new fad (e.g. Toyota Matrix)

I see vehicles that weigh twice what my car does and have three times the rated HP. They are crawling down the highway entrance ramps and trying to enter traffic at 2/3 highway speed. Those same drivers tell me they need all that horsepower. What they need is to learn how to drive.

Most drivers use HP because they don't know how to handle their car. The little sports cars of the '50s could out handle many modern overpowered cars and those little cars had a fraction of the power that most drivers would accept today.

Americans judge the car by stomping on the gas pedal and expecting it to go woosh. That's hardly a reasonable estimation of a car.

And transportation engineering studies have shown the exact opposite.

Major study on fuel economy attitudes in the '70s oil crisis - one question was:

"Have you installed a thermidor in your car to improve fuel economy?"

Approximately 75% of respondents said yes. These are the smart, rational drivers you sell cars to.

Mike

[J. Clarke]

A 85 KW Ballard 902 is about the size of a full-tower PC.

Well, now, rather than whining about it you should figure out a way to actually use that information to sell your solution.

Fuel economy is not the only cost driver.

All of this comes under the heading of "if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance bury 'em in something else". Try presenting some life cycle cost numbers and some numbers for lifecycle environmental impact.

[J. Clarke]

You mean that Ballard is not achieving the same efficiency as Pratt & Whitney was delivering 40 years ago? Pity, they need to work on that.

[J. Clarke]

How much less?

[Teamcasa]

"Michael Daly"

Teamcasa

Teamcasa

Mike, Facts please - What study(s)?

No one is going to stop or criticize you from riding a bike or walking in order to save mankind. That's your right. I object however, when your belief system begins to interfere with my desire to drive or sell whatever I want. You and Ed Begley can drive your EV1's and Prius's all you want, your free to protest the nuclear plants, (that really helped BTW) and tear down the hydroplants. Oil is here, will stay a major source of power for several more generations. If the green people had a lick of sense, they would be devoting their resources into ways to generate electricity (massive amounts) without using fossil fuels. They would buy products made locally, not from places that have to ship them across the ocean in fuel guzzling ships. They would only use natural fibers (cotton - animal fur) not synthetic ones made from petroleum.

The hypocrisy and self aggrandizement is amazing.

BTW the (few) sportscars made in the 50's are by today's standards, junk. They were polluting machines and handled terribly, but their power to weight ratio was pretty good. However, it would be nice to have my old 58' vette back.

I'll just settle for my Chevrolet diesel crewcab dually 4x6.

Dave

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services

---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **

----------------------------------------------------------

[gfretwell]

The same resources that grow food corn will have to be used for fuel corn. There is also the poblem that it costs a lot of energy to make ethanol, between growing, harvesting and distilling. Some say it is a net zero or worse. I agree there is also energy required to get oil into your tank, but oil gives back a bigger bang per gallon.

[gfretwell]

You got me, sorry for the confusion.