Maybe GM is right
4/11/05, 12:31 AM
#1
TMS Post # 1,000,000
Serbian Steamer
Serbian Steamer
Thread Starter
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Wisconsin / Serbia
Posts: 12,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today I drove past Chevy dealer and I saw new Cobalts for sale. And I started thinking. Why would a company, that made awesome powerfull cars since 1911, not compete against Mustang with another V8 muscle cars? Why would they introduce 4-cyl and go against imports?
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
4/11/05, 05:01 AM
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
This needs to be put in perspective. If you factor in Inflation and the value of the dollar(purchasing power) gas is actually at a historical low. Think about it, how much do Ameicans get paid now as opposed to thirty years ago. I read two articles and have seen one news report on this topic. Plus we still have some of the least expensive gas prices currently in the World. Every other industrialized Country taxes the heck out of their fuel.
4/11/05, 07:16 AM
#3
Bullitt Member
Join Date: February 4, 2004
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not a historical low, it's still danged expensive ... but in today's dollars, gas in 1981 was averaging over $3/gal. Back in the late 90's, when gas was around $0.85/gal or so, that was the lowest it had ever been (again, accounting for inflation).
4/11/05, 08:16 AM
#4
That's funny apparently the rate of inflation for the 80's seems to continually go up as current prices go up. A few weeks ago when prices were 2.05 a gallon people were saying that if you factor in inflation gas prices in the 80's were 2.15 a gallon. Comparing inflation to the 80's is BS. Cheeseburgers were still $.79, video game systems were still $300-$500, and there clothing still cost the same. It's all just excuses for lousy government management.
4/11/05, 03:32 PM
#5
Bullitt Member
Join Date: February 4, 2004
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1981 was on the tail end of the oil shortage, it's not "the 80s" ... "the 80s" covers a lot more territory than that. We were seeing a whole bunch of "stagflation" at the time, Carter's failed administration still had its effect. It's the truth, gas was more then than it is now, adjusted for inflation. That means, impact it realistically has on your wallet.
4/12/05, 12:03 AM
#6
Post *****
Join Date: May 13, 2004
Location: Berkeley/Redwood City, CA
Posts: 18,613
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
i wouldnt mind a better focus. i think everyone agrees with me there. but i dont think its wise for GM to drop to only 2 RWD V8 cars (goat and vette). they need something to compete with the mustang... both the ones they have now are a bit too pricey...
4/12/05, 05:52 AM
#7
Legacy TMS Member
Originally posted by Red Star@April 11, 2005, 12:34 AM
Today I drove past Chevy dealer and I saw new Cobalts for sale. And I started thinking. Why would a company, that made awesome powerfull cars since 1911, not compete against Mustang with another V8 muscle cars? Why would they introduce 4-cyl and go against imports?
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
Today I drove past Chevy dealer and I saw new Cobalts for sale. And I started thinking. Why would a company, that made awesome powerfull cars since 1911, not compete against Mustang with another V8 muscle cars? Why would they introduce 4-cyl and go against imports?
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
4/12/05, 06:15 AM
#8
Bullitt Member
Join Date: August 24, 2004
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have to understand the V8 and V6 engines now are much more fuel efficient then the 60's, 70's and 80's. This is why Ford axed the 302 5.0 to go with the more efficient and powerful 4.6L modular engine in the Mustang and other cars, technology roles with the times. GM can't compete with Ford on this level and pricing. Ford still has the Focus and Mustang to compete with the imports and other American cars. GM is forced to use the Cobalt because they messed up on the GTO.
4/12/05, 08:34 AM
#9
TMS Post # 1,000,000
Serbian Steamer
Serbian Steamer
Thread Starter
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Wisconsin / Serbia
Posts: 12,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TomServo92+April 12, 2005, 5:55 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TomServo92 @ April 12, 2005, 5:55 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Red Star@April 11, 2005, 12:34 AM
Today I drove past Chevy dealer and I saw new Cobalts for sale. And I started thinking. Why would a company, that made awesome powerfull cars since 1911, not compete against Mustang with another V8 muscle cars? Why would they introduce 4-cyl and go against imports?
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
Today I drove past Chevy dealer and I saw new Cobalts for sale. And I started thinking. Why would a company, that made awesome powerfull cars since 1911, not compete against Mustang with another V8 muscle cars? Why would they introduce 4-cyl and go against imports?
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
[/b][/quote]
V8 in Monte Carlo and Impala is not standard engine. V8 is top options. Standard engines are 3.5L V6 and 3.9L V6. Which means that not many people will get V8 even if Monte Carlo and Impala sell well.
4/12/05, 02:56 PM
#10
Legacy TMS Member
Originally posted by Red Star+April 12, 2005, 8:37 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Red Star @ April 12, 2005, 8:37 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
You seem to forget Chevy will also be offering the Monte Carlo and the Impala with V8s (albeit in a FWD configuration). Your argument doesn't make sense from that perspective.
Originally posted by TomServo92@April 12, 2005, 5:55 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Red Star
<!--QuoteBegin-Red Star
@April 11, 2005, 12:34 AM
Today I drove past Chevy dealer and I saw new Cobalts for sale. And I started thinking. Why would a company, that made awesome powerfull cars since 1911, not compete against Mustang with another V8 muscle cars? Why would they introduce 4-cyl and go against imports?
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
Today I drove past Chevy dealer and I saw new Cobalts for sale. And I started thinking. Why would a company, that made awesome powerfull cars since 1911, not compete against Mustang with another V8 muscle cars? Why would they introduce 4-cyl and go against imports?
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
You seem to forget Chevy will also be offering the Monte Carlo and the Impala with V8s (albeit in a FWD configuration). Your argument doesn't make sense from that perspective.
[/b][/quote]
And a V8 isn't the standard engine in the 300, Charger, or Mustang either. Your argument still doesn't make sense to me.
4/12/05, 03:29 PM
#11
Ford has alot more to tap in the "fuel economy" class of car than most realize, and I mean more than just the Focus. Take a trip to Europe and see what Ford build for those gas miser countries. Over there you can get the Fiesta (which looks good BTW) another small good looking car called the "Ka" they sell the "Puma" also. They could sell those here in the US at a drop of a hat if they wanted to with only small modifications to the cars. They are not worried about a small car, they have them.
4/12/05, 05:28 PM
#12
TMS Post # 1,000,000
Serbian Steamer
Serbian Steamer
Thread Starter
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Wisconsin / Serbia
Posts: 12,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TomServo92+April 12, 2005, 2:59 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TomServo92 @ April 12, 2005, 2:59 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
You seem to forget Chevy will also be offering the Monte Carlo and the Impala with V8s (albeit in a FWD configuration). Your argument doesn't make sense from that perspective.
V8 in Monte Carlo and Impala is not standard engine. V8 is top options. Standard engines are 3.5L V6 and 3.9L V6. Which means that not many people will get V8 even if Monte Carlo and Impala sell well.
Originally posted by Red Star@April 12, 2005, 8:37 AM
Originally posted by TomServo92@April 12, 2005, 5:55 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Red Star
<!--QuoteBegin-Red Star
@April 11, 2005, 12:34 AM
Today I drove past Chevy dealer and I saw new Cobalts for sale. And I started thinking. Why would a company, that made awesome powerfull cars since 1911, not compete against Mustang with another V8 muscle cars? Why would they introduce 4-cyl and go against imports?
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
Today I drove past Chevy dealer and I saw new Cobalts for sale. And I started thinking. Why would a company, that made awesome powerfull cars since 1911, not compete against Mustang with another V8 muscle cars? Why would they introduce 4-cyl and go against imports?
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
You seem to forget Chevy will also be offering the Monte Carlo and the Impala with V8s (albeit in a FWD configuration). Your argument doesn't make sense from that perspective.
V8 in Monte Carlo and Impala is not standard engine. V8 is top options. Standard engines are 3.5L V6 and 3.9L V6. Which means that not many people will get V8 even if Monte Carlo and Impala sell well.
[/b][/quote]
True, but after this year Chrysler won't even have 4-cyl car. GM will. Ford still have Focus, which is selling really slow.
4/12/05, 05:36 PM
#13
TMS Post # 1,000,000
Serbian Steamer
Serbian Steamer
Thread Starter
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Wisconsin / Serbia
Posts: 12,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TJ4Cam@April 12, 2005, 3:32 PM
Ford has alot more to tap in the "fuel economy" class of car than most realize, and I mean more than just the Focus. Take a trip to Europe and see what Ford build for those gas miser countries. Over there you can get the Fiesta (which looks good BTW) another small good looking car called the "Ka" they sell the "Puma" also. They could sell those here in the US at a drop of a hat if they wanted to with only small modifications to the cars. They are not worried about a small car, they have them.
Ford has alot more to tap in the "fuel economy" class of car than most realize, and I mean more than just the Focus. Take a trip to Europe and see what Ford build for those gas miser countries. Over there you can get the Fiesta (which looks good BTW) another small good looking car called the "Ka" they sell the "Puma" also. They could sell those here in the US at a drop of a hat if they wanted to with only small modifications to the cars. They are not worried about a small car, they have them.
4/12/05, 05:53 PM
#14
Legacy TMS Member
Originally posted by Red Star+April 12, 2005, 5:31 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Red Star @ April 12, 2005, 5:31 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
You seem to forget Chevy will also be offering the Monte Carlo and the Impala with V8s (albeit in a FWD configuration). Your argument doesn't make sense from that perspective.
V8 in Monte Carlo and Impala is not standard engine. V8 is top options. Standard engines are 3.5L V6 and 3.9L V6. Which means that not many people will get V8 even if Monte Carlo and Impala sell well.
And a V8 isn't the standard engine in the 300, Charger, or Mustang either. Your argument still doesn't make sense to me.
Originally posted by TomServo92@April 12, 2005, 2:59 PM
Originally posted by Red Star@April 12, 2005, 8:37 AM
Originally posted by TomServo92@April 12, 2005, 5:55 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Red Star
<!--QuoteBegin-Red Star
@April 11, 2005, 12:34 AM
Today I drove past Chevy dealer and I saw new Cobalts for sale. And I started thinking. Why would a company, that made awesome powerfull cars since 1911, not compete against Mustang with another V8 muscle cars? Why would they introduce 4-cyl and go against imports?
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
Today I drove past Chevy dealer and I saw new Cobalts for sale. And I started thinking. Why would a company, that made awesome powerfull cars since 1911, not compete against Mustang with another V8 muscle cars? Why would they introduce 4-cyl and go against imports?
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
You seem to forget Chevy will also be offering the Monte Carlo and the Impala with V8s (albeit in a FWD configuration). Your argument doesn't make sense from that perspective.
V8 in Monte Carlo and Impala is not standard engine. V8 is top options. Standard engines are 3.5L V6 and 3.9L V6. Which means that not many people will get V8 even if Monte Carlo and Impala sell well.
And a V8 isn't the standard engine in the 300, Charger, or Mustang either. Your argument still doesn't make sense to me.
[/b][/quote]
Both the Dodge Status and Chrysler Sebring sedans come with a 4-cylinder as the standard engine. Are they going away next year?
4/12/05, 06:11 PM
#15
GM is actually doing very poorly in terms of economy cars.
The Cobalt is replacing a 20-year old chassis, and they are killing a mid-sized RWD platform to build.... guess what... more big trucks and SUV's. So they are not really gearing up for fuel economy.
The real reason GM is not building a competitor for the mustang is they don't have a cost-effective chassis, and they don't have the R&D money free to dump money into developing a low-volume car. They still have to make a huge capital investment to re-work any of their current chassis to build a ponycar chassis.
The fact that GM is behind even Ford in getting a hybrid to market shows they are not in the fuel economy game full-force yet.
The Cobalt is replacing a 20-year old chassis, and they are killing a mid-sized RWD platform to build.... guess what... more big trucks and SUV's. So they are not really gearing up for fuel economy.
The real reason GM is not building a competitor for the mustang is they don't have a cost-effective chassis, and they don't have the R&D money free to dump money into developing a low-volume car. They still have to make a huge capital investment to re-work any of their current chassis to build a ponycar chassis.
The fact that GM is behind even Ford in getting a hybrid to market shows they are not in the fuel economy game full-force yet.
4/12/05, 06:24 PM
#16
TMS Post # 1,000,000
Serbian Steamer
Serbian Steamer
Thread Starter
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Wisconsin / Serbia
Posts: 12,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by TomServo92+April 12, 2005, 5:56 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TomServo92 @ April 12, 2005, 5:56 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
You seem to forget Chevy will also be offering the Monte Carlo and the Impala with V8s (albeit in a FWD configuration). Your argument doesn't make sense from that perspective.
V8 in Monte Carlo and Impala is not standard engine. V8 is top options. Standard engines are 3.5L V6 and 3.9L V6. Which means that not many people will get V8 even if Monte Carlo and Impala sell well.
And a V8 isn't the standard engine in the 300, Charger, or Mustang either. Your argument still doesn't make sense to me.
True, but after this year Chrysler won't even have 4-cyl car. GM will. Ford still have Focus, which is selling really slow.
Originally posted by Red Star@April 12, 2005, 5:31 PM
Originally posted by TomServo92@April 12, 2005, 2:59 PM
Originally posted by Red Star@April 12, 2005, 8:37 AM
Originally posted by TomServo92@April 12, 2005, 5:55 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Red Star
<!--QuoteBegin-Red Star
@April 11, 2005, 12:34 AM
Today I drove past Chevy dealer and I saw new Cobalts for sale. And I started thinking. Why would a company, that made awesome powerfull cars since 1911, not compete against Mustang with another V8 muscle cars? Why would they introduce 4-cyl and go against imports?
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
Today I drove past Chevy dealer and I saw new Cobalts for sale. And I started thinking. Why would a company, that made awesome powerfull cars since 1911, not compete against Mustang with another V8 muscle cars? Why would they introduce 4-cyl and go against imports?
On the way home, I stoped by local gas station and gas was $2.50 a gallon. Maybe that's why Chevy is going with 4-cyl instead of V8. If prices of gas keep going up the way they people won't be buying powerfull V8s no matter how good and cheap they are. Sales of Fords top Trucks and SUVs (F-Series, Explorer, Expedition) are already down (by a lot). I'm afraid something like that may even happen to Mustang in the next few years.
Chrysler does same thing. They keep introducing bigger and bigger engines and they killed only car that could get average gas mileage (Neon).
Back in the early 1970s Ford and GM were saved because of cars like Pinto and Vega. They stinked comapred to big V8s (just like Cobalt stinks now comapred to Mustang), but they saved Ford and GM. Back then Chrysler didn't had 4-cyl (not until late 1970s when they got Omni) and they almost died.
Maybe GM is right with whole Cobalt thing. Maybe Ford should focus more on Focus and other 4-cyl cars.
You seem to forget Chevy will also be offering the Monte Carlo and the Impala with V8s (albeit in a FWD configuration). Your argument doesn't make sense from that perspective.
V8 in Monte Carlo and Impala is not standard engine. V8 is top options. Standard engines are 3.5L V6 and 3.9L V6. Which means that not many people will get V8 even if Monte Carlo and Impala sell well.
And a V8 isn't the standard engine in the 300, Charger, or Mustang either. Your argument still doesn't make sense to me.
True, but after this year Chrysler won't even have 4-cyl car. GM will. Ford still have Focus, which is selling really slow.
[/b][/quote]
I forgot about Stratus and Sebring. But do you really think Stratus and Sebring are gonna compete against Cobalt and Focus? They cost too much for 4-cyl car. Stratus is almost $21,000, Serbing is almost $23,000. And they can only get 20 mpg. My 3.8L Mustang can do just as good.
4/12/05, 08:23 PM
#17
Legacy TMS Member
Originally posted by Red Star@April 12, 2005, 6:27 PM
I forgot about Stratus and Sebring. But do you really think Stratus and Sebring are gonna compete against Cobalt and Focus? They cost too much for 4-cyl car. Stratus is almost $21,000, Serbing is almost $23,000. And they can only get 20 mpg. My 3.8L Mustang can do just as good.
I forgot about Stratus and Sebring. But do you really think Stratus and Sebring are gonna compete against Cobalt and Focus? They cost too much for 4-cyl car. Stratus is almost $21,000, Serbing is almost $23,000. And they can only get 20 mpg. My 3.8L Mustang can do just as good.
4/12/05, 09:07 PM
#18
TMS Post # 1,000,000
Serbian Steamer
Serbian Steamer
Thread Starter
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Wisconsin / Serbia
Posts: 12,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My 2nd car is 1997 Dodge Intrepid Sport with 3.5L V6 (top Intrepid offered that year). Its fun to drive, but I had to many problems with him to like it. If I ever go for sedan again, I'm going for import.
4/12/05, 09:14 PM
#19
Legacy TMS Member
Originally posted by Red Star@April 12, 2005, 9:10 PM
My 2nd car is 1997 Dodge Intrepid Sport with 3.5L V6 (top Intrepid offered that year). Its fun to drive, but I had to many problems with him to like it. If I ever go for sedan again, I'm going for import.
My 2nd car is 1997 Dodge Intrepid Sport with 3.5L V6 (top Intrepid offered that year). Its fun to drive, but I had to many problems with him to like it. If I ever go for sedan again, I'm going for import.
