GM + Chrysler?

DrBoost wrote:

geomiata wrote: what part of the duramax gets lauged at? the more power than the cummins? maybe the more torque than the cummins? could it be the better fuel economy? yeah right. and the new chevy was the truck of the year. man those auto magazines sure are dumb huh. maybe thats why the dodge came in last in that comparison. to be fair though that was the old gen ram, and the new one is the one to compare with the chev, but still, come on.

Dude, are you on dope? The Cummins is the diesel engine that get's respect. The Isuzu-Max is good, but not as good as the Cummins. I'm not talking about the manfacturers ratings, I'm talkinging about what diesel owners buy diesels for. Torque and life expectancy. The Durocrap has torque but will NEVER regularly go 1/2 a million miles without needing any work other than maintenance. You can't possibly think the Cummins is the inferior engine can you?

ahh the duramaxipad and the powerchoke.. Flat Land fast...

Magazines love them.. So fast with a load on the flat land.

Go put on 10k lbs then hit a big hill.. mountain even.. Then you'll see that v8's belong in cars. I-6 is for trucks.

How about this.. You go get a chevy .. I'll get my old beat shop truck(MY04.5 ram 3500 4x4) 1st one to the eisenhower tunnel with same load wins..

edit: one more thing.. the 2008 and 2009 duramax engines are one trick ponies. They do not meet 2010 emissions standards are are going to be significantly redesigned to meet those standards in 2010. The cummins engine does not require a redesign. It already meets 2010 standards now. So that engine will be in production until 2012(when new EPA standards kick in). Chevy and ford need new engines in 2010 and then again in 2012. I got a feeling cummins will be able to use existing architecture for a long time. in diesels emmissions cost power, so for a real power comparisson, wait a year. I think we know who will be on top in 2010...

Man; this merger is really going to happen. Feel bad for the Chrysler people

As for the QC question with VW: I will say that our cars have issues with wiring connections and the 2.0L FSI engine. Outside of that the 2.5L 5 cylinder is dead nuts reliable and gets great mileage for a tractor engine, Brakes last forever, shocks last forever, seats are awesome compared to the Cobalt (and remember I LIKE the Cobalt) The transmission lines seem to have one issue with the autos, they learn bad habits too quickly and need to be reset an awful lot, but the owner can do this at home.

I just don't see a puzzle where GM and Chryco fit on the same board. I can see Hyundai/Kia and Chrysler are an automatic fit as well as Fiat and Chryco, Ford and VW, Cryco and VW... hell GM and VW but you will notice the strength of Chrysler and the inequities of the mated company should create a better organization. Period.

Imagine the backing that GMAC (part of the Cerberus deal) would have if the money is backed by the Euro. Remember GMAC is still straddled with a ton of bad housing debt.

bruceman wrote: Man; this merger is really going to happen. Feel bad for the Chrysler people

linky? I hope UAW or some union can throw a wrench into the deal

bruceman wrote: Man; this merger is really going to happen. Feel bad for the Chrysler people

Or not http://www.cnbc.com/id/27465743

Pleaze be chrysler /Nissan, Pleaze be chrysler /Nissan, Pleaze be chrysler /Nissan

GM suspended their offer yesterday. They said their financial problems were severe enough that they may run out of cash in 2009 without essentially a market miracle or a government bailout.

Uncle O won't let GM go down. Too many UAW workers involved. If Reagan could bail out Chrysler, Uncle O will bail out GM to keep the UAW in business.

The UAW will need to accept compensation packages similar to U.S. workers at foreigh plants and about a 25% job cut without the ridiculous jobs bank.

I am a corporate bond trader. Here is my idea to save the Detroit Three (although it will never get through Congress)

http://mksense.blogspot.com/

Bad News:

GM cutting 1,000 jobs at plant that make Cobalt. If you can not sell the cheap and fuel efficient model, what can you sell?

http://www.vindy.com/news/2008/nov/08/gm-cuts-include-lordstown-plant-production-cobalt/

Quote from article: "The layoffs come after Lordstown added 1,400 workers in early summer to staff a third shift to build the Cobalts and G5s when demand for those cars surged due to record high gasoline prices.

However, the Cobalt couldn't escape the credit crunch that began hitting especially hard in September and shows little sign of ending. Cobalt sales plunged 61 percent in October to 6,478 from 16,505 in October 2007 - the second-lowest lowest since the car was introduced four years ago."

http://www.salemnews.net/page/content.detail/id/507562.html?nav=5007

So, with further review it seesm that they picked up 1400 workers when gas went up and are letting go 1000 now that gas is down and credit is tight.

There is a lot of concern at the dealer level about future warranty claim payments, parts delivery, you name it. If any of the Big 3 goes under or has to reorganize, there is no telling what will happen at our level.

People are just not buying new cars in the numbers they used to. The old ones will be kept and hopefully there will be more service work. Usually in a downturn, new car sales drop but service and parts pick up. Right now, it's down all across the board for everyone. That's kinda scary.

It's not just here in the States, it's worldwide BTW. Overall new car sales were off 6% globally. http://us.ft.com/ftgateway/superpage.ft?news_id=fto102920081104058993

In a prepackaged bankruptcy, a compnay is in and out of bankruptcy instantly. Even if traditional CH XI is used, GM would be in better shape than now as it would be out of debt. The only downside is if the UAW refused to accept more realistic wages and benefits.

Because of current employee expenses (including the jobs bank) and legacy costs, the break even price of a GM vehicle is about $24,000. This means it loses money on every Cobalt produced.

Dr. Hess wrote: Uncle O won't let GM go down. Too many UAW workers involved. If Reagan could bail out Chrysler, Uncle O will bail out GM to keep the UAW in business.

Mr. Obama won't be needing their votes for a while.

Aren't you the guy that promised us we'd all be drinking the KoolAid offered by Ms. Clinton?

SVreX wrote: Aren't you the guy that promised us we'd all be drinking the KoolAid offered by Ms. Clinton?

naa he was 70% mccain. 30% LQ

gm is out, Hyundai may be in...

http://www.reuters.com/article/americasDealsNews/idUSTRE4A67HP20081107

anyone in the market for a "high caliber accent??? "

And here is where the next Mopars would be built (sans UAW):

http://www.hmmausa.com/

Hmm that prepackaged bankruptcy thing sounds like a great idea! Just the thing we need to obliterate the UAW. That would solve more than half of Detroit's problems right there.

A little more on the topic: http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081108/AUTO01/811080376/&imw=Y

Sweet Jesus !!! The things you miss when you go to the bathroom!!! The whole business sounds like ChryCo is dead or dying, and Cerebus is just looking to dispose of the corpse, in (unlikely) event of its' death. Seriously, bits of ChryCo's line are already being sold by someone else. The 1-ton and bigger pickup is being sold now, by Sterling, with Sterling markings. Sterling itself was recognizably Ford, a few years ago. You can still see the relationship between the big SD Ford pickup and the Sterling...look at the cutout of the door's window opening. That little dip at the front of the window opening...That's the one. There are several places you can see the DNA. So, it wouldn't be THAT big a stretch to imagine the truck line and Jeep being spun off, or the Viper, for that matter. It's happened before. How many owners has Jeep had in the last 60 years? Looks like it'll be at least one more by the end of the year. ChryCo has always had a bad way of handling the financial problems it's had. This is just more of the same. The only time it's been remotely profitable in the recent past (past 25 years) has been while Iaccoca was in charge.

Sterling has been owned by Freightliner since it was renamed so being part of the Daimler Chrysler empire it got Dodge light trucks. It also sells re-badged Mitsu cabovers.

Chrysler was profitable in the mid-90s as well. In fact, it was the most efficient automaker in the world during the days of the Cab Forward push. However, management decided to hand out pay raises (largely to each other) and by 1998 Ma Mopar had now R&D budget. Chrysler then went crawling to Daimler.

GM may be in worse shape at this time. Management aknowledged that the company may not have enough cash to survive 2008,

Congressional leaders are trying to convince GW that the three should be included in the bailout.

Wally wrote: Sterling has been owned by Freightliner since it was renamed so being part of the Daimler Chrysler empire it got Dodge light trucks. It also sells re-badged Mitsu cabovers.

Sterling is dead as of the second quarter of 2009. The cabovers will be marked through Mitsubishi Fuso dealers in the US. All of the Class 6-8 stuff is just getting dropped. I assume the "Sterling Bullet" cab-chassis Dodge is dying as well.