GM Lab Eco Initiative: investigating the "bare necessity" car & truck

[Frank Lee]

An empty 20' trailer made of coroplast?

The puller has to have enough heft to keep the pullee from getting the upper hand!

[Frank Lee]

Put a box on the back... truck of the future!

[tjts1]

The problem is every poverty spec car (thats what we're talking about here) has to compete with much nicer, much better equipped used cars. So unless you're a complete tool and incapable of dealing with not having a warranty, poverty spec cars will never sell in the US.

[5speed5]

Originally Posted by tjts1

The problem is every poverty spec car (thats what we're talking about here) has to compete with much nicer, much better equipped used cars. So unless you're a complete tool and incapable of dealing with not having a warranty, poverty spec cars will never sell in the US.

Unless the poverty-spec car/truck also gets 40+ mpg. Then you bring in a
whole new market of greenies, penny-pinchers and long-commuters.

Case in point, back when I bought my first '98 Chevy Metro (circa 2002),
I paid $3400 for it w/51K miles. I could have bought a '93 Buick (loaded to the gills with options as Buicks tend to be) for about the same price, but I had a long commute, and the Buick didn't get 50+ mpg.

[5speed5]

Originally Posted by KITT222

I guess the Metro is also a bare-needs car. But the GM you all hate is the Wagoner-controlled GM. Wagoner believed the SUV was the real money-maker. I am going to admit, I love GM. New GM, after they started over, is listening, and observing the competition. They have recently premiered some excellent vehicles. They are focusing less and less on the truck and SUVs. Their most successful large vehicle they have currently is the Equinox, which achieves 32MPG, which is best in class. Meager by Ecomodder's standards, but its a step in the right direction. The Cruze is rumored to get around 40MPG, and the Spark and new Aveo are going to get at or over 40MPG. The new GM is trying, and doing much better than the old GM.

Agree with the last part, but truthfully, even under Rick Wagoner, GM had
best-in-class fuel economy with the Malibu/Aura/G6 (2.4L 6-spd auto),
the Cobalt/G5 XFE, the full-sized trucks/SUVs (not even counting hybrids),
and 4x4 midsize trucks (Colorado/Canyon). They also had the first available hybrid full-sized trucks/SUVs, and Wagoner's the one that gave the go-ahead for the Volt and Cruze back in 2007.

GM made a lot of dumb moves in it's time, but the countless news stories back during the bankruptcy opining something along the lines of "GM makes only gas hogs with poor quality" were dead wrong....and that's despite having to pay exorbitant UAW wages and benefits that the Japanese makers didn't have to.

Toyota is now in the #1 spot and they're having a great time there too.

[tjts1]

Originally Posted by 5speed5

Case in point, back when I bought my first '98 Chevy Metro (circa 2002),
I paid $3400 for it w/51K miles. I could have bought a '93 Buick (loaded to the gills with options as Buicks tend to be) for about the same price, but I had a long commute, and the Buick didn't get 50+ mpg.

But you still chose to buy USED. GM couldn't care less about used car sales. It doesn't do them any good. Any self respecting penny pincher would never buy new, especially a stripped out car. Its the fundamental flaw of small cheap new cars. Nobody wants to pay new car money for a 3 cylinder bucket that can barely get out of its own way, but they sell great on the used market once the price has dropped at least 50%.

[travelingaaron]

I like the idea of a 40mpg truck. I like the reversible bulkhead too. I owned a Nissan Titan king cab for a while. I needed the longer bed to haul my bike and other things around but often wished I had the space of the Crew cab when I was hauling friends around and had nothing in the bed.

These vehicles very well may never see the light of day, however I am sure there are new ideas being conjured up in this process. The people in the videos seem genuinely interested in being green and I see nothing wrong with that. The green ideas they come up with can be used on other vehicles or if nothing else serve as starting points for more ideas to develop.

[5speed5]

Originally Posted by tjts1

But you still chose to buy USED. GM couldn't care less about used car sales. It doesn't do them any good. Any self respecting penny pincher would never buy new, especially a stripped out car. Its the fundamental flaw of small cheap new cars. Nobody wants to pay new car money for a 3 cylinder bucket that can barely get out of its own way, but they sell great on the used market once the price has dropped at least 50%.

I certainly understand your point, but it depends on the price. If GM were able to make a new bare-bones car that cost under $8000 with full warranty and gets 40+ mpg, you may not get all the penny pinchers, but you'll certainly get a few of them (penny pinchers would factor in maintenance costs), and you'd get lots of the greenies and the long-commuters. There are people who refuse to buy used cars...I'm not one of them.

I don't think they can do it with the safety and emissions regulations, though.
They came close with the Aveo5 Special Value ($9995 w/no-AC and no radio) back in 2007 and earlier, but I can't imagine how much more bare bones they can make it.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by tjts1

The problem is every poverty spec car (thats what we're talking about here)...

Are we? I thought we were discussing minimalism & efficiency. As for instance it's certainly reasonable to regard a Lotus as a bare-bones car in a good many respects, but they sure aren't poverty-spec :-)

[aerohead]

I wanted to reply but I couldn't get beyond nausea.Thanks!