Chevy Cruze Sales Bomb - Lordstown Plant To Lose Shift & Jobs

[Imcrazy]

10 minutes ago, DSChamber said:

Yeah....we weren't in the market for a sedan so I wouldn't be able to comment on those. But the Terrain and Traverse did not bring much to the table at the same price point as the CX5 and Sportage.  GM has come a long ways but they are still behind the curve when it comes to putting in "standard options" that most drivers have enjoyed as "standard" in imports for a long time. I remember when I owned my 2010 Sierra and a friend of mine had bought a new , entry level 2010 Kia Rondo.  Her car came standard with Bluetooth phone pairing yet my truck which was almost $30k more did not, I thought that was completely nuts

Yeah I agree, I can say that my base model mazda 6 had a ton more features than the base model Malibu, I had to jump up the LT and get the 'convenience' package to get the connectivity we wanted and it wound up being roughly a $27k MSRP where as the Mazda 6 we had was about 24k MSRP... Funny thing is my lease payment on the Mazda was $280 and the Malibu is $250 (both sign and drive with no money up front for 39 months) .... What year Terrains we're you looking at?  I feel like the entry level Chevy's are a bit slim on equipment for sure, I am considering an Equinox or Terrain for my wife and it seems like I need to get the MSRP around 30k to get the features we want, maybe I'll stay and look at Mazda or Honda again....

Edited April 17, 2018 by Imcrazy

[Loco-diablo]

Stiff competition in in Cruze market. Tough place to win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DSChamber]

7 hours ago, Imcrazy said:

Yeah I agree, I can say that my base model mazda 6 had a ton more features than the base model Malibu, I had to jump up the LT and get the 'convenience' package to get the connectivity we wanted and it wound up being roughly a $27k MSRP where as the Mazda 6 we had was about 24k MSRP... Funny thing is my lease payment on the Mazda was $280 and the Malibu is $250 (both sign and drive with no money up front for 39 months) .... What year Terrains we're you looking at?  I feel like the entry level Chevy's are a bit slim on equipment for sure, I am considering an Equinox or Terrain for my wife and it seems like I need to get the MSRP around 30k to get the features we want, maybe I'll stay and look at Mazda or Honda again....

We bought the Kia Sportage EX,  second trim class down from it's top EX Premium (we would have bought the Premium as it was only another $3500 and the features it brought were worth it, but the dealership couldn't get us one in the color we wanted when we wanted it)...... for the features we got we would have had to go up to a high end packaged SLE or LT in the Terrain/Traverse and would have had to pay almost $40,000 about $6000 more than we paid for the Kia ( I live in Canada so that's Canadian $$)....   put it this way,  the top tier EX Premium came with a lot more features than say a SLT or LTZ,  cost about $6000 less, and comes with 5 years/100,000 bumper to bumper warranty as opposed to 3 year/60,000.... no brainer in our minds

 

[Imcrazy]

11 hours ago, DSChamber said:

We bought the Kia Sportage EX,  second trim class down from it's top EX Premium (we would have bought the Premium as it was only another $3500 and the features it brought were worth it, but the dealership couldn't get us one in the color we wanted when we wanted it)...... for the features we got we would have had to go up to a high end packaged SLE or LT in the Terrain/Traverse and would have had to pay almost $40,000 about $6000 more than we paid for the Kia ( I live in Canada so that's Canadian $$)....   put it this way,  the top tier EX Premium came with a lot more features than say a SLT or LTZ,  cost about $6000 less, and comes with 5 years/100,000 bumper to bumper warranty as opposed to 3 year/60,000.... no brainer in our minds

 

I hear you to some extent but, I have a very tough time buying foreign products these days but, I also put myself / needs above the principal of 'buying' American.... If all other things are equal I would shell out another 2-3k for an American Vehicle but, beyond that is my limit or if the foreign product just suits my needs better and or has superior quality.

[MikeNH]

I'd have a tough time considering a Cruze or Malibu vs the competition too. Kia/Hyundai are killing it. Though frankly living where I do and only having one vehicle, whatever I buy will need to be AWD/4WD. So basically that means if I buy a car it'd be a Subaru Legacy. Only other affordable AWD is the Fusion but Ford builds that in Mexico and can't seem to stop sending them here with trunks full of weed.

[qwank]

The new Cruze is so boring compared to other small cars out there.  An available 2.0T with a manual trasmission would make all the difference in the world.  Young kids like fast, turbo cars.  Not 1.5T eco turbos that break #1 Pistons every 30K miles.

 

There's no Cruze SS and GM failed on that part.  The Cobalt went out with a 263hp, manual transmission 4 or 2 door car and GM hasn't had anything like that since 2010.  

 

They also discontinued all manual transmissions in the Cruze as of the 2019 model year

 

I still have my supercharged G5GT and don't see me replacing it with anything from GM anytime soon, unless I want to pay way too much for a 6 speed ATS coupe.  

Edited April 18, 2018 by qwank

[Colossus]

Kia/Hyundai have their flaws as well. 
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/autos/research/seven-engines-to-avoid-like-the-plague/ar-AAvS762?li=AAggFp0#page=1

 

[Grumpy Bear]

Margin squeeze. You can squeeze the juice out of an orange and once done...it's done. Honda did this with the Civics. We've owned three. 1998, 2003 and the 2006 and each was a major step down in features, comfort and cost effectiveness. Price held constant between 98 and 03 each year getting less car. The 2006 is a joke of a car and my last Honda. I sat in a 2016 and while it had tons of gadgets the quality was still eroding. I was actually told dirt and orange peal are no longer considered detracting features for new buyers. Really? The seat, dash and steering wheel were each on separate planes. You felt twisted in this car. This car is in the tank. 

 

And yet...the Cruze is worse. Same piece of junk wrapped around a more inferior driveline. Sedans are not dying because no one wants one but because people are waking up and saying I'm not paying that kind of money for JUNK. 

 

You can shear a sheep forever. You can only skin him once. 

[Imcrazy]

5 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Margin squeeze. You can squeeze the juice out of an orange and once done...it's done. Honda did this with the Civics. We've owned three. 1998, 2003 and the 2006 and each was a major step down in features, comfort and cost effectiveness. Price held constant between 98 and 03 each year getting less car. The 2006 is a joke of a car and my last Honda. I sat in a 2016 and while it had tons of gadgets the quality was still eroding. I was actually told dirt and orange peal are no longer considered detracting features for new buyers. Really? The seat, dash and steering wheel were each on separate planes. You felt twisted in this car. This car is in the tank. 

 

And yet...the Cruze is worse. Same piece of junk wrapped around a more inferior driveline. Sedans are not dying because no one wants one but because people are waking up and saying I'm not paying that kind of money for JUNK. 

 

You can shear a sheep forever. You can only skin him once. 

My wife had a 2008 Honda Civic, compared to the 2005 my Father in law had at the time the '08 was of inferior quality no doubt... These entry level sedans are probably sold more on their low price than anything I suppose so the Manufacturers feel like they can let the quality slide and not lose sales, where as if they raise the price and maintain the quality the short term minded American consumers will still buy their cars.. Quite frankly we didn't much care about the quality we leased that Civic in 2009 because it was cheap and we didn't even concern ourselves with the long term durability or quality the car was in warranty the entire time we owned it and we tossed Honda the keys at the end and leased another economy car for even less $ for the next 3 years and have continued to lease cars based mostly on their price... We stepped up to a Mazda 6 on our previous car and now a Malibu but, the most I've paid on a monthly basis is $250 with no money up front.. I can't justify owning one for $350 a month over 5 or 6 years of payments and then have to maybe put $1000 - $2000 a month into it after the payments are over and have it be worth peanuts when it's 10 years old... The only reason I am currently making payments to 'buy' my Silverado is because I put about 2k miles a month on it and my employer makes about 95% of my payment for me... Otherwise I just lease 'em because quite frankly they depreciate so quickly it's a good way to protect your wealth by agreeing to only be responsible for a predetermined amount of depreciation over a fixed period of time and duration of use... I wish cars and trucks were built to last but, it seems to me that the market is geared towards a average ownership is 3 years and a long term of ownership is 5-7 years... Based only on the ultra thin sheet metal I don't see how these newer vehicles would last 20 years without being full of dents and rusting to pieces...

[KARNUT]

I test drove a Honda, Camry, VW, Sonata. All were loaded the same felt close to the same. Read the reviews on all and Honda had the best reviews, even the entry level Honda. I’m surprised at the negative towards the Honda all the reviews I’ve read put them at the top. I bought the Camry based on price at the time,find it to be well worth the money. It was just under the Honda according to the reviews. The only I didn’t like about the Honda was the CVT transmission.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Grumpy Bear]

5 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

I test drove a Honda, Camry, VW, Sonata. All were loaded the same felt close to the same. Read the reviews on all and Honda had the best reviews, even the entry level Honda. I’m surprised at the negative towards the Honda all the reviews I’ve read put them at the top. I bought the Camry based on price at the time,find it to be well worth the money. It was just under the Honda according to the reviews. The only I didn’t like about the Honda was the CVT transmission.

The Gen 6 97-99 (98) HX I owned, for example, had a forged steel four wheel independent five link suspension. Pretty heady stuff for a economy car. Don't normally see a true five link till the price tags get closer to 200K. One of the nicest riding/handling cars I've ever owned. Even my Buicks could take a lesson from the sixth generation of Honda Civics. Tire wear is unbelievable as no matter what stance the car takes the five link keeps the tire flat face down.  Alignment was perfect.Factory wheels were Enkei. 100K was in the bag on factory rubber IF you did you maintenance due diligence. 

 

 The HX D16Y5 motor was a 40 mpg+ motor even at 70 mph. Slightly less in the winter. I choose the 5 speed manual box and after a fluid change to Red Line MTL which actually allowed perfect low gear synchromesh it was flawless. Interior materials were as close to 'bulletproof' as it comes and while plain, it wasn't cheap looking. Every control worked to perfection. 

 

The Gen 7 went the way of the decades old Super Beetle. McPherson Strut up front and really crude three link out back. Honda hasn't got the top link length right EVER. My 2006 ate tires at factory alignments and finally I gave up on Honda and went MOOG 'problem solver' UCA's and ended that fight. Honda was a total twit about making it right. In fact as it wasn't a 'safety' recall there was but a memo on it for those persistent enough to (figuratively) blow the roof of some dealership. True fact. The Honda Replacement UCA's can actually be WORSE (shorter) than the delivered units. They tried to cover the flaw with huge toe in and silly camber angles. I never got more than 8,000-12,000 out of a tire until the MOOG arms and my alignment numbers. Last set, 70,000 and counting. So much for the value of a Warranty. I don't give them six months of thought. 

 

I consider the Gen 6 Civic a multimillion dollar engineering success in $14,000 packaging. I'd have bought a dozen and stored them had I know what they would be in Honda's History. HX and Si were the two best in those years $ for $. 

 

The 2003 and later models not worth the ink to advertise them. If that would have been my business someone's head would have rolled. Between 99 and 2001 the price remained the same but about 5K was pulled in parts. Cheap window regulators. McPherson. Cheap wheels and tires. Lost the twin wideband O2 system responsible for the crazy mileage the HX GEN6 got and lost the multiport dry system. Cheap out on interior materials and fit/finish went to the dogs. The clear coat has peeled off the 2006. Clear in sheets. Take a look at your local 06 Civics. They all do it.

 

Panel wave on the newest models is shameful as is the paint quality. Garbage.

 

Anyway......The Cruze started where the Honda devolved to over time. It's a car for teenage Crows. Shinny Tech and not a spec of build integrity. 

[KARNUT]

The Gen 6 97-99 (98) HX I owned, for example, had a forged steel four wheel independent five link suspension. Pretty heady stuff for a economy car. Don't normally see a true five link till the price tags get closer to 200K. One of the nicest riding/handling cars I've ever owned. Even my Buicks could take a lesson from the sixth generation of Honda Civics. Tire wear is unbelievable as no matter what stance the car takes the five link keeps the tire flat face down.  Alignment was perfect.Factory wheels were Enkei. 100K was in the bag on factory rubber IF you did you maintenance due diligence. 
 
 The HX D16Y5 motor was a 40 mpg+ motor even at 70 mph. Slightly less in the winter. I choose the 5 speed manual box and after a fluid change to Red Line MTL which actually allowed perfect low gear synchromesh it was flawless. Interior materials were as close to 'bulletproof' as it comes and while plain, it wasn't cheap looking. Every control worked to perfection. 
 
The Gen 7 went the way of the decades old Super Beetle. McPherson Strut up front and really crude three link out back. Honda hasn't got the top link length right EVER. My 2006 ate tires at factory alignments and finally I gave up on Honda and went MOOG 'problem solver' UCA's and ended that fight. Honda was a total twit about making it right. In fact as it wasn't a 'safety' recall there was but a memo on it for those persistent enough to (figuratively) blow the roof of some dealership. True fact. The Honda Replacement UCA's can actually be WORSE (shorter) than the delivered units. They tried to cover the flaw with huge toe in and silly camber angles. I never got more than 8,000-12,000 out of a tire until the MOOG arms and my alignment numbers. Last set, 70,000 and counting. So much for the value of a Warranty. I don't give them six months of thought. 
 
I consider the Gen 6 Civic a multimillion dollar engineering success in $14,000 packaging. I'd have bought a dozen and stored them had I know what they would be in Honda's History. HX and Si were the two best in those years $ for $. 
 
The 2003 and later models not worth the ink to advertise them. If that would have been my business someone's head would have rolled. Between 99 and 2001 the price remained the same but about 5K was pulled in parts. Cheap window regulators. McPherson. Cheap wheels and tires. Lost the twin wideband O2 system responsible for the crazy mileage the HX GEN6 got and lost the multiport dry system. Cheap out on interior materials and fit/finish went to the dogs. The clear coat has peeled off the 2006. Clear in sheets. Take a look at your local 06 Civics. They all do it.
 
Panel wave on the newest models is shameful as is the paint quality. Garbage.
 
Anyway......The Cruze started where the Honda devolved to over time. It's a car for teenage Crows. Shinny Tech and not a spec of build integrity. 

Hmmmm, maybe they’ll wise up before it’s to late.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Grumpy Bear]

2 hours ago, KARNUT said:

Hmmmm, maybe they’ll wise up before it’s to late.
 

Honda or GM 

[Loco-diablo]

Kia/Hyundai have their flaws as well. 
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/autos/research/seven-engines-to-avoid-like-the-plague/ar-AAvS762?li=AAggFp0#page=1
 

There was a time when Hyundai/Kia were cheaply priced. Now they’re right up there with Honda and Toyota. I have 2 friends that own Elantra’s. One of them had the engine blow at 70k, the other has had engine trouble as well. The cars are loud and tinny imo. The door shut like a sardine can.
For the same money, I’d go Toyota or Honda. Just my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KARNUT]

I’ve owned a total of 4 Hyundai’s still have a 13 year old Elantra GT and a 7 year old Genesis no complaints. Thought I was going to buy my fifth with a Sonata. Got a Camry cheaper, go figure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk