After Rick Wagoner's announcements this morning, GM Car Czar Bob Lutz was bubbling over with product news. Of course, Maximum Bob overlooked the fact that someone else's year-old warmed-over Pontiac leftovers may be nourishing, if they're seldom appetizing or appealing. Anyway, MB revealed that the Chevrolet Cobalt will be around for a lot longer than we'd been led to believe. It's "no where near the end of its life-cycle" and it's "finally coming into its own" (whatever that is). So what about the Cruze? It'll be sold eventually but not as the Cobalt's replacement. And then there's the news that's upsetting Autoblog's readers: the Beat won't go on, at least not in the U.S. Apparently, the small car that GM needs right now wasn't designed with federal crash and safety standards in mind (doh!). It would cost too much and take two years to fix that short-sighted screwup prepare the car for compact-loving 'Mericans. So when CEO Rick Wagoner said earlier today that GM has "a global operating framework that allows us to respond to changes in the U.S. market, a commitment to technology leadership, and an ever stronger and competitive product line-up," he wasn't talking about small cars. Except the Aveo and Cobalt. And the Pontiac-nourishing G3 and G5.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
What?!?!
The Cobalt is one of, if not the worst small car you can buy. How can he say it is “coming into it’s own” with a straight face? Of course they are selling now with gas so high, but they are also selling for about $8,000 less than what Honda makes on every Civic. Keep up the good work Bob.
I am waiting for the press conference when he says “Surprise! Mission accomplished, we have successfully achieved Ch 11. That was the plan all along.”
Apparently, the small car that GM needs right now wasn’t designed with federal crash and safety standards in mind
Just when I thought that GM had truly done everything in its power to crash and burn.
Amazing.
I’d be anxious to see the “Cruze” with a split grille.
Le Mans v 3.0 anyone?
Sounds nourishing to me.
Didn’t Ford sell both the Escort ZX2 and Focus in the early 2000’s together for a few years? In addition, didn’t Ford have difficulty selling the Escort because of the new Focus? If this was the case, why is GM repeating the mistake by having both the Cobalt and Cruze available in 2010 and beyond?
They’ll be “nourishing” Pontiac the same way they always have, with re-grilled Chevrolets and now Daewoos. Joy.
kericf
“The Cobalt is one of, if not the worst small car you can buy.”
While I am very disappointed in how management has run GM into the ground, I can’t let this statement stand unchallenged.
See the latest Road and Track, Fast and Frugal > “http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?
section_id=10&article_id=6881” Cobalt comes out on top.
This test result was, I admit, surprising. But the Cobalt has done well in other tests and it is selling well enough to add capacity at the plant.
Does the Cobalt warrent a refresh? Sure, it’s 4+ years old. Is it the best out there? No. Enough to save GM? No. But not the worst car out there by a long shot. Enough hyperbole, GM has done quite enough to screw things up without your help.
How can anyone rightly say that any company has designed a specific car for this specific market?
They can’t. Everyone designs for many markets with different content for marketing and safety in each market.
The Cobalt isn’t bad at all. NEver been in a Kia Lanos have you?
Or a Hyundai?
GM had the Cavalier and Cobalt on sale at the same time. Heck, in Canada, they had both sedan and coupe versions of the Cavalier, Sunfire, Cobalt, Pursuit (now G5) and the Optra/Optra5/Optra Wagon–all at the same time.
Oh, and the Ion. Never forget the Ion.
Comparatively, Honda had…the Civic. Toyota had…the Corolla and Matrix.
Even now, up to their ass in alligators, GM management doesn’t get it. Nissan was nowhere near this far gone when Carlos Ghosn gutted them like a fish, but GM seems incapable of anything more than tinkering.
kericf – The Cobalt is one of, if not the worst small car you can buy.
monkeyboy – Does the Cobalt warrent a refresh? Sure, it’s 4+ years old. Is it the best out there? No. Enough to save GM? No. But not the worst car out there by a long shot.
I agree with monkeyboy. The Cobalt has some nice features, like the ubiquitous GM trip computer that you can’t get in a Mazda3 or a Civic, which I think are best-in-class. I would put the Compass, Caliber, Suzuki SX4, Kia Rio, and Hyundai Elantra at “worse” than the Cobalt.
Is the Cruz a Daewoo of some flavor? What other car does or will it share platforms with? Where was it designed? What engine / drivetrain will it have and from what? What will they call the Saab or Buick or Cadillac versions? Will GMC get a version of this too or Saturn?
I remember how sad it was to see my once vibrant grandparents decline, and it is likewise sad to see Lutz blabbering on incoherently. Global designs which can’t sell in the US? A big raz-ma-taz about picking the Beat design only to keep it from the home market? His sell by date is long past and he will soon be spending more time on his Segways (Lutz owns four ?) than flying any jets. I can hardly wait to see how the “Autoextremist” spins this one.
It’s beyond astonishing at this point – it’s simply sad. Pontiac, in particular, is drowning in rebadged garbage, and Lutz is handing them a glass of water. There has to be some sort of grand golden parachute that’s even bigger and more ridiculous than we all imagine waiting at the end of the rainbow for GMs head honchos. almost as if they will make even more money if they run GM to the ground rather than right it and sail off into the sunset (if it can be righted. 50-50 shot right now).
How else can you explain a marque that is already overloaded with rebadged indistinct, overlapping disappointments being ‘nourished’ with even more, uninteresting, overlapping rebadges?
“The Cobalt is one of, if not the worst small car you can buy.”
I drove one as a rental in Florida. Compared to the Hyndai Accent and Daewoo Aveo, if was a revelation with regards to acceleration and comfort. Unlike a PT Cruiser, the Cobalt’s fuel mileage was never below 32 mpg on the highway, while hot footing it, too.
It may not be up to snuff against the Honda Accord, but there are worse cars on the road.
It is beginning to seem like GM has sent Bob Lutz out to disseminate misinformation.
Hmmm. This Cruze info is puzzling. The only possible explanation is the following:
(1) Aveo (Daewoo) (Needs redesign and new engines)
(2) Cruze (Daewoo) (Fiesta/Fit/Yaris Fighter)
(3) Cobalt = Redesigned on new Delta architecture (along with Astra). Must be getting bigger. (Civic/Corolla/Mazda3/Focus Fighter)
(4) Malibu (Epsilon)
(5) Impala (whatever)
Pontiac needs only 4 models = Vibe / Solstice / G6 / G8. Needs a new G6 as of yesterday.
kericf…were you thinking of the Aveo, rather than the Cobalt? I am not in love with the Cobalt, but there’s plenty worse. Personally, I am quite fond of how it looks and the new engine in the SS version makes for a pretty entertaining package.
That being said, they do need a competitive small car, and now with the Beat out of the picture, I can’t imagine what ass, er, rabbit they are going to pull that out of.
The Cobalt equals any small car available and undercuts the so-called class leaders by at least $2k. The Cobalt’s powerful 2.2L engine makes the the Toyota/Honda offerings look anemic. Cobalt has all the right moves.
Just a personal observation as one living in California and traveling around a lot of the state for business and pleasure: There are a freakin’ lot of new cars on the road, but most of them seem not to be from the domestic makers. I am seeing so many new small Hondas, Toyotas, Kias, Hyundais, Suzukis it is amazing. I went to a wedding in Pasadena, Ca over the weekend, while standing outside waiting to go to the reception, I counted nine new cars go by (in thirty minutes) and all were non-domestic. I know this is just observational, but if this is what is going on in other parts of the country, the domestics sales figures will continue to be destroyed.
The Cobalt isn’t bad at all. NEver been in a Kia Lanos have you?
Or a Hyundai?
No, I haven’t. Have you ever been in a Fit? Or a Focus, for that matter?
“Not the absolute worst” isn’t the same as “good.” :)
I would hardly call a car salient in the marketplace if its only competition is God-hating dodges and korean cars that should come with a “countdown to transmission failure” clock.
I didn’t care for the giant useless expanse of a center console. (So where’s my iPod go? Cubbies? Nooks? Crannies? Anything? I’ll just tape it here to the dashboard, then). Or the scads of unnecessary, expensive features no one wants (someone picked ‘oil-life monitor’ over ‘iPod jack?!’). Or the teensy little side mirrors that show only the side of the car before tapering down to nothing. Overall, the Cavalobalt strucks me as a vehicle that was never actually test-driven before it was manufactured.
The Cobalt has only really ever been competitive in the “pizza delivery vehicle” category, anyway.
sean362880
Ok, but that still doesn’t bode well when your saying it is better than the Caliber/Patriot(same car), a Suzuki(Chevy/Daewoo clone as well), and Kia/Hyundai(essentially the same). It is still well behind the 3 and Civic and though I don’t like the Corolla it is probably behind it on most people’s lists. But I guess my statement as “if not the worst” may be inaccurate, but it is by no means good. It is middle of the pack at best.
The only reason anyone buys a Cobalt over a 3, Civic, or Corolla is clearly price. Granted, I do not like the Corolla at all, but it will sell on it’s Toyota reputation alone. So even with the Cobalt doing “well”, it is not a good car by any means compared to some others out there. And from the sound of things they don’t plan on changing much any time soon. Considering what a Civic sells for (figure about ~$16-18k on avg.), Honda makes much more ching on each car then GM does on the fire sales for the Cobalts (~$12k on avg.). It just isn’t helping their situation at all.
You can get a trip computer on a Civic and 3, but it only comes on certain trim levels, and I can do without a trip computer if it means not driving a Cobalt (thanks Thrifty car rental for the experience!).
“The Cobalt equals any small car available and undercuts the so-called class leaders by at least $2k. The Cobalt’s powerful 2.2L engine makes the the Toyota/Honda offerings look anemic. Cobalt has all the right moves.”
It undercuts the class leaders by $2k (and is not considered a class leader) because that “powerful” 2.2 liter engine has all the refinement of a John Deere lawnmower and the interior is made by Fisher-Price. Granted, the Eco-Tractor is reliable and gets good fuel economy. But some people want a little more in a car than basic transportation at the cheapest price. Wal-Mart is a price leader, too. You get what you pay for, and there is a big difference between price and value.
limmin: The Cobalt equals any small car available and undercuts the so-called class leaders by at least $2k. The Cobalt’s powerful 2.2L engine makes the the Toyota/Honda offerings look anemic. Cobalt has all the right moves.
I can’t decide if you’re being sarcastic or not…but here goes:
So for roughly $2k less (base vs. base), you’re getting worse interior materials and ergonomics, far worse handling, worse MPG (2mpg less epa vs. civic), worse base equipment, no power doors, mirrors, or windows, no cruise control, no steering mounted radio controls, 15in wheels (civic has 16), no floor mats, optional ABS, no passive anti-theft, and finally, 2 less speakers. You gain .4l on the engine, adding 8hp, and +24 on the torque, and losing a ton of refinement and smooth revving, not to mention the much slicker Honda shifter. Anemic, eh? So the Cobalt would probably beat the Civic and Corolla off the line from a red light, but it hardly has the right moves.
“The Cobalt is one of, if not the worst small car you can buy.”
You’re quite right, the Cobalt is one of, if not the worst small car you can buy.
“The Cobalt equals any small car available and undercuts the so-called class leaders by at least $2k. The Cobalt’s powerful 2.2L engine makes the the Toyota/Honda offerings look anemic. Cobalt has all the right moves.”
LOL!
Another very important characteristic of the Cobalt which is often overlooked, without the Cobalt auto mechanics everywhere would find it harder to make a decent living.
Putting the joking to one side for a minute. If a 100 year old car company which has been the biggest on earth for 60 of those years with all it’s resources and talent, can only come up with a product such as the Cobalt as it’s answer to the Civic/Corolla then it’s no wonder it’s doomed.
I can’t fault GM for keeping the Cobalt around as long as there’s demand. I keep hearing people demand for the Neon to come back to Chrysler lots.
Pontiac makes no sense anymore though.
limin-look at the actual road test mpg figures on a Cobalt. Look at several tests (no cheery picking) and compare them with the competition.
It gets the mileage (real world not EPA) of a midsize car. One example, recent CR test (and they have avery consistent mpg test) Cobalt 24mpg overall, Corolla 32 mpg overall.
All for a few tenths off of the zip to 60 time? Great move in an economy car.
Give me the 33% extra mileage any day, there are many cars that get Cobalt mpg that are tons more fun, and faster.
Bunter
Wow. For a while there I was thinking I should actually consider a Cobalt for my soon to come car purchase. Not so much any more.
Focus?
I don’t think the Cobalt is a bad car. But it’s midpack at best, and it’s not going to get better with age.
Even when it first came out, it looked half a generation old (out-blanding the traditional blandmobiles). Its mileage was/is mediocre (that’s more important than its big power). The interior was bad to midpack depending on the trim level. It was alright, but it was only going to sell by being cheaper than the competition. Then spy shots of its replacement – said to be coming in 2009 – came out, and I was happy. GM was finally learning that they need to update their products on time! And now they’re not.
A car that’s midpack (or even mildly competitive) when new isn’t going to be so attractive after the competition has gone through one and maybe even two design cycles. I thought they’d learned this already.
Cobalt has all the right moves.
If depreciation is a right move, then you probably have a point. Otherwise, not so much.
I have spent considerable time in the Cobalt. On the whole, I’d say that it is decidedly mediocre at best. Reasonable packaging, comfortable enough and decent highway fuel economy, but the motor was harsh and noisy, and the automatic didn’t help matters.
Compared to the rest of the field, this is not a highly competitive vehicle. Certainly better than the bottom dwellers, but not on par with the class leaders by a long shot. If you’ve driven the competition, it’s hard to get excited about it, although if you limit yourself to the Detroit 2.8, it’s not the worst of the bunch. (That’s why God created Dodge, you know.)
I shopped a G5 before I bought my Elantra — the Hyundai just felt all-around better made. With a 2k rebate, it bacame a “no-brainer”.
Maybe GM should consider covering up that watermelon-sized muffler hanging under the back of the car with something, and maybe adding some trim around the windshield so that it doesn’t look like it’s ready to pop out.
It was just the “little things” that turned me off to the Cobalt/G5, and most G5 GT’s on the lots were “optioned up” to 20-21k!
OnStar is also an unwelcome addition, as well.
Skooter Says:
CR: Cobalt 24mpg overall, Corolla 32 mpg overall.
Nonsense.
EPA’s numbers (automatic transmission) aren’t much better:
Cobalt 22/31, combined 26
Corolla 27/35, combined 30
I just had to ride in the back of one to/from lunch on a bidness trip (rental). Man, is it small compared to our Priora. Yet FUDders will still attempt to classify them as compacts…
Bob looks constipated. Or maybe it’s all that Michigan tan he’s soaking up.
My experience is that Consumer Reports’ fuel economy numbers are much more reliable than those “EPA test” numbers. For one thing, the EPA numbers are actually come up with by the auto makers, supposedly using an EPA standardized procedure. They also don’t even measure the actual fuel consumed, but rely on deriving the fuel numbers from exhaust gas analysis. Look up the test cycles and you will find something which looks nothing like any normal driving situation.
EPA fuel economy numbers are about as reliable as the BLS’ inflation numbers.
Somebody needs to take the spray-on tan bottle away from Lutz. The stuff has clearly seeped into his brain.
As someone that has a lot of seat time in rental cars and pool cars, I have to say that the Cobalt is, in fact, a terrible car. I had one in New Mexico as a rental and it was the high end non-SS model. First impression was “this isn’t so bad”. The gas mileage was 30mpg in Albuquerque for 2 days and up to Santa Fe and back, which wasn’t terrible, but not impressive considering my driving style/habits. Lots of things in the car simply didn’t work (auto-returning turn signal stalk). Getting it up to merging speed was much like my 1993 Impreza L (1.8L of fury) without the fuel economy. I mostly blame that on the terrible AT. The Honda Fit (which I drove w/ an AT) was a much better driving car, more practical, and nicer inside for less money.
In short, for the money, I would be in a Honda Fit way before I’d ever punish myself with a Cobalt. It was an absolute joy firing up my 07 GTI after a week w/ the ‘balk.
# Skooter:“you’re getting worse interior materials and ergonomics”
What? Typical ignorance- probably never sat in either car.
“15in wheels (civic has 16″- Wrong. 2008 Civic DX cpe has 15 in wheels.
“and losing a ton of refinement and smooth revving, not to mention the much slicker Honda shifter.” Right. Honda automatic? Sure. And more opinionated facts.
Wow…let’s play feed the troll.
Considering the rundown I gave was from a skimming of a edmunds comparo, it’s actual fact. And apparently you didn’t bother to read, where I said base v base, which the base civic is a manual. Are you actually trying to say that the gm manuals are slicker than the hondas? HAHAHAHAH
By the way, I’ve driven both several times, chief. The base cobalt, which my parents had as a rental, had interior plastics that looked and felt like a fuckin’ Lego blocks. So I’d love to know how it’s ignorance…
Cobalt is a very good car. Mine is 2005 with 44,000 teen-driven miles. No problems whatsoever. An excellent value.
I have to ask you — when you shopped for your car, what other cars did you compare it to? Did you test only other domestics, or did you also test drive the transplants and foreign competition?
Just fix the friggin Aveo until it becomes a legitimate Fit fighter, fer chrissakes! It shouldn’t be THAT hard, and at least it would make a pretty good first step on the road to recovery.
Yes, but those were different times. The Escort was in the way of customers trying to get to Expeditions, Explorers and F150’s.
If someone was looking to purchase a small car in 2001, I don’t know why they would all the sudden decide to purchase a SUV upon seeing one. The small car market has certainly grown since the early 2000’s, but it still doesn’t make much sense to sell what is more or less the same car right next to each other. I have a feeling Pontiac is also going to want a G4 version of the Craze, which with the G5, means that GM will have four vehicles that are ostensibly the same. Each will hurt the sales, both in terms of volume and dollars, of the others.
eggsalad:
Just fix the friggin Aveo until it becomes a legitimate Fit fighter, fer chrissakes! It shouldn’t be THAT hard….
And fix the economy and the housing crisis while you’re at it! And to borrow a phrase from Bill Watterson, “as long as I’m dreaming, I’d like a pony.”
The Aveo is, in a word, unfixable. The only measure to be taken on the way to unseating the King of the Subcompact Class would be to execute the Aveo and replace it with something that doesn’t suck.
In that vein, and as long as we’re dreaming, GM should carpet-bomb the Aveo plant and start manufacturing 1st-gen Scion xB’s [which Toyota stupidly abandoned], and solve two idiot decisions at the same time! :)
JuniorMint Says:
July 15th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
eggsalad:
Just fix the friggin Aveo until it becomes a legitimate Fit fighter, fer chrissakes! It shouldn’t be THAT hard….
And fix the economy and the housing crisis while you’re at it! And to borrow a phrase from Bill Watterson, “as long as I’m dreaming, I’d like a pony.”
The Aveo is, in a word, unfixable.
=========
Look, Honda doesn’t own any magic pixie dust. The Fit has an engine, chassis, and suspension that is in no way rocket science. GM still has good engineers and manufacturing capabilities.
There isn’t anything about a Fit that can’t be replicated. Even if it’s not “fix the Aveo”, there’s no reason GM can’t build a legitimate Fit fighter.
(Assuming it wants to, of course)
Skooter – Sure did. It hasn’t let me down in the 25k miles I’ve put on it. Oddly enough, I hated VWs prior to driving and eventually buying the GTI.
The Cobalt is today’s Vega. GM again got caught off base when a fuel crisis happened and this is all they’ve got to stay in the high mileage game.
GM’s Chevy Cobalt is not the worst small car you can buy. The worst small car(s) you can buy in the U.S. happen to be made by GM Daewoo, but neither of them are named Aveo nor Aveo5.
They’re named “Forenza” and “Reno” and sold as Suzukis. Poor acceleration, poor handling, and embarrassing fuel economy. You can buy Cobalts and Aveos that will approach 34/36mpg (XFE version), but you can’t buy either Suzuki and expect a reliable 30mpg. So why do they exist?
Plenty of people are happy to buy Cobalts in spite of their shortcomings. Their money, their choice. They aren’t automatically stupid for not buying Civics, which seems to be the implied notion of Cobalt detractors.
(And yes, I do own one. Nice deal from a friendly local dealer. And it’s a happy reward for putting up with my problematic ’93 Altima I had lived with since college.)
Eggsalad:
There isn’t anything about a Fit that can’t be replicated. Even if it’s not “fix the Aveo”, there’s no reason GM can’t build a legitimate Fit fighter.
(Assuming it wants to, of course)
Agreed, agreed, and, most sadly agreed. :) That last bit is key. A fit-fighter would be well-within GM’s reach, if only they’d build the damn thing.
Whether the Aveo is replaced, or so thoroughly re-engineered that it’s basically replaced anyway, the insurmountable obstacle is GM’s tradition of punishing people who like small cars. Hence my pronouncement of “unfixable” refers to both the defective car and the defective management. :)
I don’t hold the Fit in any special regard, btw – I drive a Scion. :)
The Cobalt is not as bad as some make it out to be, but it is in no way a class leader. And some class leaders are what GM badly needs, especially at the entry level. Think of how many first time buyers who purchased Cavaliers because they were enticed by the affordable price. I’m willing to bet that very few of those buyers became repeat GM customers. Fact is this: If a Cobalt price is all I can afford, I would be buying a much better three year old used car.
I know we’re beating a dead horse here, but about the Cobalt:
****A similarly equipped Cobalt can be had for many thousands less than a Civic/Corolla. We can compare equipment levels all day, but in the end, the Cobalt wins.
****The Cobalt’s ecotec4 takes at least 1500 miles to “break in” for optimum acceleration and mileage. My car has the ecotec and its performance improved dramatically after a few months. Maybe that’s why the CR tests showed a big mileage disparity.
****The Asian 1.8L mills are ostensibly more fuel efficient than the Cobalt’s 2.2L–under ideal conditions. However, I’ve been on message boards and the 1.8L mileage drops like a lead zeppelin with accessory use (a/c) and more passengers. In particular, I’m seeing great dissatisfaction with the real-world Civic mileage.
The Cobalt has weaknesses. Its seats are inferior to its rivals. (The Civic front seats are magnificent.) And the Cobalt’s 4sp automatic is ancient and inexcusable.
But in the end, the Cobalt is a better value. Honda has every right to charge $18K for a Civic. That doesn’t mean they should. A college kid looking for cheap wheels would rather pay $14k for a Cobalt and pocket the difference for books and booze.
So, limmin, are you trying to tell me that the Asian 1.8L engines don’t have a ‘break-in’ just like the ecotec? Really, all engines have a break-in period before they hit optimum mileage. And you don’t really expect the best and brightest here at TTAC to believe that just because the Cobalt has a .4l larger engine, that the fuel efficiency doesn’t drop when the car is loaded up and has the A/C on?
I don’t know what message boards you’re getting your info from, but it certainly isn’t ToV…really? great dissastifaction across the board with mileage on the Civic? And there’s the happy dance going on everywhere with the Cobalt’s real-world mileage?
I’d love to see an options list to get to a $4k difference between a Civic and a Cobalt that would be a better value. I’m betting the $18k Civic would be a trim level up from the Cobalt at $14k. The real-world price difference is $1800-2500. And with that you get much much more in the way of standard features, as i outlined in my previous post. The facts are out there, regardless of if you choose to ignore them in your argument.
A base Civic has an MSRP of $15,680 compared to a base Cobalt at $15,070. Granted GM and it’s dealers will toss you almost $2,000 in rebates and discounts, but the delta in around $2-2.5k, not $4k as some have implied.
Chevy’s .4 extra liters of displacement nets all of 8 extra horsepower, and when you go with an automatic transmission, Honda’s is 5-speed compared to an ancient 4-speed in the Chevy.
Had the misfortune of renting a Cobalt last winter. The 2.2 Ecotec with 4-speed auto was surprisingly peppy, but gave lousy gas mileage, I got 28 mpg driving mostly on Interstates at approximately 75 mph. I get 38 mpg on the same routes in my Civic.
Cobalts are cheap to buy and own pretty much as there’s lots of used parts from wrecks and junked ones already. Can’t fault that. But saying a Cobalt is a better built car than a Civic is a major stretch by the imagination. And there’s very, very few companies that make inline 4 manual transmissions that operate better than Hondas – and Chevy is not one of them.
But back to the point – nourishment of Pontiac by Lutz or Waggy could mean a simple IV feed to a comatose patient – is that their idea?
You want Pontiac to flourish? Get Patrick Stewart on the phone and have him do Pontiac commercials again. Make it so!!
Frank Williams:
So when CEO Rick Wagoner said earlier today that GM has “a global operating framework that allows us to respond to changes in the U.S. market, a commitment to technology leadership, and an ever stronger and competitive product line-up,” he wasn’t talking about small cars. Except the Aveo and Cobalt. And the Pontiac-nourishing G3 and G5.
So if he wasn’t talking about small cars, does anyone really know what he WAS talking about? Should I even be asking this question?
I can’t help wondering whether the debate here is going in the right direction. The question whether some competitors are better than the Cobalt in one area or another is about as close to the point as a colon cancer patient wondering whether he’d be better off with a cough or a mild headache.
Whether or not the Cobalt is awful, underwhelming or sort-of-ok, it’s simply not good enough to be a sales leader – which is what GM needs right now. GM’s product portfolio is awash with vehicles like the Cobalt: from me-too stuff that is as boring as Belgium on wheels (if somebody can explain to me the unique selling point of the Pontiac G5, for instance, go ahead) right down to absolutely appalling clonkers like the Chevrowoo Aveo or the Pontiac Grand Prix.
It seems the GM shareholders are perfectly happy with an executive board that just keeps on making one grotesque decision after another. With the amount of cash that Rick Wagoner’s management skills have cost GM over the last few years, you could run two dozen small countries for a decacde. Why this gigantic loser and his cronies haven’t been tarred, feathered, quartered and then dragged into a courtroom is beyond me – so you couldn’t foresee a sharp rise in gas prices when everyone else on the planet could? Well, of course, that would be too much to ask from a 15-million-a-year executive, wouldn’t it?
Eight years into his tenure as CEO, GM still has too many brands, too many models competing for the same customer, too many employess, and too much bureaucracy. Since 2000, GM has lost market share, customer loyalty, sales volume, and bilions and billions of dollars. There is no coherent product strategy, no coherent branding, and simply no idea of how to deal quickly with a very drastic change in the market. Examples?
There is lots of small car expertise in GM Europe but apparently no one knows how to use this knowledge in the US. Or this priceless bit of sheer idiocy: GM – finally! – presents a cool small car with great fanfare (the Beat) – only to admit to the same people later that they won’t ever be able to buy it because, hey, it’s not good enough for US crash regulations. Or Cadillac, which builds sporty sedans now while Pontiac, the “excitement” division, gets rebadged crap that is as exciting as, well, rebadged crap. Robert Farago has cited countless other examples in the GM Death Watch series, so I basically think there is only one “solution”:
GM stockholders have allowed a bunch of overpaid, good-for-nothing executives to run the company into the ground for many years – so the only thing they deserve is losing everything. With this in mind, the debate about the Chevy Cobalt’s qualities seems to lose some of its relevance.
I think we all focused on the Cobalt because it’s GM’s entry-level car. As you know, GM’s hierarchal divisions were conceived to promote lifelong consumer commitment. Customers would buy their first car from Chevy, then move up to Olds, Buick, and finally (in their twilight years) to a nice big soft Caddy.
But it’s the entry-level car that hooks the customer and identifies a company’s commitment to quality. The people who bought the first tiny Civic in the 70s pretty much stuck with Honda for 30 yrs. Because Honda figured out what GM used to know: that the best customers are repeat customers. And repeat customers are the best advertisements….
GM’s problems started when it couldn’t build a decent entry-level car. (Remember the Vega and Chevette??) The entry-level car determines brand loyalty, certainly for a decade or so; perhaps even for life.
I’ll never leave the GM family. As for where I am on the GM consumer “hierarchy”….I’m stuck at Olds. Not the best place to be.
Basically, instead of GM competing against itself by having multiple brands selling the same product or different product in the same market segment, now GM is competing against itself in the same showroom by selling two different products at the same dealer. Brilliant!
The funny thing is that the “Old”smobile division was starting to produce some refreshingly different designs (albeit, still badge-engineered to some extent), and that’s the division they axed. Dumb.
And the Cobalt is still “meh” IMHO.
The funny thing is that the “Old”smobile division was starting to produce some refreshingly different designs (albeit, still badge-engineered to some extent), and that’s the division they axed. Dumb.
And the Cobalt is still “meh” IMHO.…
Sadly, this seems to be part of GM culture. Cobble together a product (Fiero, or “Twin Dual Cam” engines) from existing stuff, introduce to market, have customers do some free Beta testing, cement reputation in customers mind for said product being crap, then spend money to fix, reintroduce product as it should have been from day one, watch product languish in market place and pull the plug. One can’t help but wonder how much healthier GM would be if the last iterations of each product were actually what GM introduced first.
Something to note about many GM products: I like to work on my family’s vehicles, so I have a perspective that many here MAY not have, as this seems to be a distinctly “clean hands” site. When you work on GM products, you discover quite the dichotomy of design and material choices. Much of what you find under the hood is actually quite well made and is thoughtfully laid out. Service for many components is reasonably straightforward (ok, Northstar starter location sucks). Yet, go to remove a door panel and you end up with a bunch of broken one-use fasteners…same thing for many interior trim parts. It seems that two distinct groups are at work here…
“Nourish with products” does NOT mean having Aveos or Cobalts with nose jobs sold as Pontiacs, or having the long-in-the-tooth G6 languish on for another few years.
Lets see here:
1) G6 – In bad need of either a refreshing or a complete redesign. When it first debuted, it was a game changing car for Pontiac and its amazing the car still looks good (IMHO) to this day. GM shouldn’t let a good product like the G6 go to waste.
2) G5 – OK, if they’re going to market this Cobalt clone, at least give it more than plastic surgery. Alter the suspension points, give it more power, PLEASE give it the turbo 2.0 four pot so it can at least live up to the divisions “Excitement” tag line
3) G3 – You’ve got to be kidding. Needs to be axed ASAP. A Pontiac version of the Chevy Beat would’ve done wonders for Pontiac, especially if it could be equipped with the new 1.4l turbo engine.
4) G8 – Keep it coming.