By on September 24, 2008

Stop selling. To be fair, it’s no surprise GM NA Prez Troy Clarke Troy felt obliged to respond to The Christian Science Monitor‘s anti-bailout ed. “Years of mismanagement, high executive salaries, and overly generous worker benefits have indeed hurt the Big Three… Detroit is no more deserving than many other US industries – textiles, furniture, toys – that have failed to compete well against foreign companies.” In response, Clarke quickly trots out the usual arguments: GM provides American jobs, GM’s [drug on the market] alt power cars help U.S. energy independence, climate change is a bitch, Mars is in retrograde, etc. And then we’re off in uncharted territory. For one thing, Clarke confirms the memo on the Volt’s non-ICE rechargable batteries. “The Chevy Volt, an electric vehicle that will go on sale in late 2010, will deliver 40 miles of gasoline- and emission-free driving on a single charge and hundreds more miles by using a small gas engine to generate additional electricity.” For another, he’s already talking about widening the federal loans’ retooling remit. “The capital raised through these loans can be spent on such efforts as increasing our nation’s R&D in advanced batteries and alternative fuels, and retooling our factories to build new vehicles that use these advanced technologies.” As for proof that GM has the brains for the job… “Nearly a century ago, GM introduced the automobile self-starter, a technological breakthrough that banished the hand-crank forever. As the Volt demonstrates, GM is still at the forefront of advancing automotive technology.”

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

15 Comments on “Bailout Watch 66: When You’ve Sold Something…...”


  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    As for proof that GM has the brains for the job… “Nearly a century ago, GM introduced the automobile self-starter

    That would be Henry Leland who did that (who went on to found Lincoln), and I’m not sure Cadillac was in GM hands at the time. And he did it because a friend of his was killed when the crank was thrown into his face.

    Is the moral of the story that GM innovates only when people are at risk? (poke, poke).

    Again, this is very early in the 20th century. I’d hardly say GM, the entity, was responsible for the electric starter. But lets not let history stand in the way of PR.

  • avatar
    jolo

    “…As the Volt demonstrates, GM is still at the forefront foreskin of advancing automotive technology…”

  • avatar

    psarhjinian : That would be Henry Leland who did that (who went on to found Lincoln), and I’m not sure Cadillac was in GM hands at the time.

    Kettering made the self-starter, not Leland. It was 1912 and I think GM owned Cadillac at that point. Course, they didn’t exactly make it, they just bought it, which is par for the course in this industry.

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    Kettering made the self-starter, not Leland

    Really? I always thought it was Leland, but you’re right: he more or less prodded Kettering into designing it.

    I consider myself schooled.

  • avatar
    MikeInCanada

    ….and Dr Emmett L. Brown invented the “Flux Capacitor” which can be found throughout the GM product line. No, wait, that’s not right. I’m still a little bit drunk from breakfast and am getting my Google searches mixed up.

    Sorry.

  • avatar
    joeaverage

    Hey there is some truth in the innovation only comes from GM customers being at risk… Or sometimes it only comes from government mandate.

    Drum brakes, non-power disc brakes, 5,000 lb cars, resisting seat belts, leaving the after market to supply the left spring under the early Corvair’s rear suspension to prevent wheel tuck, etc.

    GM moves forward only when they have to IMHO.

    Of course to be fair there are a number of innovations (like EVs) that other companies have demonstrated they can build but won’t until the industry as a whole does it. I’m looking squarely at the RAV4-EV here. Maybe it has more to do with Chevron’s stranglehold on the NiMH battery patents than Toyota’s unwillingness to build EVs.

    I don’t know.

    Another question is why don’t manufacturer’s use their “advanced” technology to bring us a car that can easily be upgraded and repaired so that it lasts 250K miles? They’ve got the bodies and chassis lasting longer but cars get ugly or too expensive to maintain by a mechanic long before they are totally worn out.

  • avatar
    nudave

    Actually, I believe the Volt demonstrates that GM is still at the forefront of advanced automotive bullshit.

  • avatar
    John Williams

    Another question is why don’t manufacturer’s use their “advanced” technology to bring us a car that can easily be upgraded and repaired so that it lasts 250K miles? They’ve got the bodies and chassis lasting longer but cars get ugly or too expensive to maintain by a mechanic long before they are totally worn out.

    Probably because you’ll end up keeping that car and not buying another new one for a long while.

    Planned obsolescence. That’s the word of the day.

  • avatar
    Lumbergh21

    I looked but couldn’t find the words “Special Advertising Section” anywhere. This couldn’t possibly have been a news article written by a reporter, could it?

  • avatar
    BlueEr03

    John Williams said:
    Planned obsolescence. That’s the word of the day.

    As in, the Volt will be obsolete by the times it hits production?

  • avatar
    HarveyBirdman

    I think GM took aim at the Christian Science Monitor because it published an editorial several weeks ago arguing strongly against the bailout. Whether Troy Clarke mailed his editorial to every newspaper that ran an anti-bailout editorial, well, who knows.

  • avatar

    HarveyBirdman :

    I think GM took aim at the Christian Science Monitor because it published an editorial several weeks ago arguing strongly against the bailout. Whether Troy Clarke mailed his editorial to every newspaper that ran an anti-bailout editorial, well, who knows.

    That answers that question.

    Amending text. Tx.

  • avatar
    joeaverage

    As in, the Volt will be obsolete by the times it hits production?

    And the Camaro… Hope this means they are going the extra ten miles to get these products right.

  • avatar
    yankinwaoz

    I was always under the impression that it was race car drivers who came up with most of the safety features of cars. Rear View Mirrors, seat belts, roll bars, etc.

  • avatar
    joeaverage

    The race guys invent it but it has many times taken the gov’t to force auto makers to put these features into their consumer vehicles.

    Sometimes that is good and sometimes that is bad.

    On one hand I want a safe car and on the other hand I want a lightweight car without the modern car’s bulk and complexity. Yeah, I want my cake and eat it too.

    Yeah, I’d buy a new ’84 VW Rabbit ‘vert or GTI if it was available (without the modern bulk).

    I’d travel in my airbag equipped Honda though leaving the VW for my second car duties.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Lou_BC: @Carlson Fan – My ’68 has 2.75:1 rear end. It buries the speedo needle. It came stock with the...
  • theflyersfan: Inside the Chicago Loop and up Lakeshore Drive rivals any great city in the world. The beauty of the...
  • A Scientist: When I was a teenager in the mid 90’s you could have one of these rolling s-boxes for a case of...
  • Mike Beranek: You should expand your knowledge base, clearly it’s insufficient. The race isn’t in...
  • Mike Beranek: ^^THIS^^ Chicago is FOX’s whipping boy because it makes Illinois a progressive bastion in the...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber