 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / GMC Cars / September 2006Well what do you know, GM to announce longer warranties
I suppose that the Mike Hunters of the world will now say this is a brilliant move while in the past they have laughed at the idea when I have suggested it many, many times. http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/060906/autos_gm_warranty.html?.v=1 Too little, too late Stu >I suppose that the Mike Hunters of the world will now say this is a >brilliant move while in the past they have laughed at the idea when I have >suggested it many, many times. > > http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/060906/autos_gm_warranty.html?.v=1 > Too little, too late > > Stu I agree, the market leader should show leadership rather than being a follower. GM is clearly a follower in this one. All they really did is to extend the powertrain portion of the warranty to 5 years. Toyota, Honda, Ford and Hyundai are already there or more. GM made theirs 5 years or 100,000 miles, but that high mileage limit will only effect a very small number of buyers. Oddly enough, the high mileage limit makes buying used off-rental vehicles more attractive. Hertz, for example, usually sells their cars at 6-12 months old and with 20-25k miles on them. Here is the updated news story: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060906/ap_on_bi_ge/gm_warranties_3 John >> Too little, too late >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > John Typically the market leader is a follower. Dell is the marker leader for PC's, everyone else comes out with the new features sooner then when the price drops Dell includes them and sells a whole bunch more. Microsoft is the market leader copying ideas from Apple, linux, Firefox, etc. >> Too little, too late >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > John in July, Ford Motor Co. (F) extended its powertrain warranties by up to two years on its 2007 Ford, Lincoln and Mercury models. On Ford and Mercury vehicles, the powertrain warranty was raised to five years or 60,000 miles, whichever comes first, up from the current three-year, 36,000-mile bumper-to-bumper warranty. Lincoln powertrain warranties were extended to six years or 70,000 miles, up from the previous four-year, 50,000-mile bumper-to-bumper guarantee. The warranties cover the engines and transmissions and are retroactive to any 2007 models that already have been purchased, Ford said. The automaker also offers similar guarantees on 2006 models still on the lots. >Too little, too late > >Stu Still doesn't touch Hyundai's warranty (at least the original Hyundai owner). As much as I love my Chevy...sad but true fact. Anyone got a 98 or newer Lumina they're willing to sell for $1500 or less? ;) A friend of mine (a month ago) whittled her car choices down to a Hyundai Elantra or a Saturn Ion. The end result? The Hyundai. Why? Tons more standard features and warranty for (roughly) $3000 less. Come on GM, pick up the pace! -GV Actually in every dealer meeting that I attended, for just about every brand we sold, when I was in retail I suggest the manufacture include a 100,000 extended service plan be added to the base price of every model they sold. Doing so would cost a relatively small amount, around $700, when one considers historically less than one percent all extended warranties sold ever pay out more than the cost of the plan and the deductible. The extended warranty should only apply to the original owner. mike hunt >I suppose that the Mike Hunters of the world will now say this is a >brilliant move while in the past they have laughed at the idea when I have >suggested it many, many times. > > http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/060906/autos_gm_warranty.html?.v=1 >Actually in every dealer meeting that I attended, for just about every brand >we sold, when I was in retail I suggest the manufacture include a 100,000 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >mike hunt Please expand on this; "warranty should only apply to original owner" Is it no longer a GM product when the original owner sells the car ? Is it now "an orphan product"? I'm not baiting you.... its' just that this phrase often comes up in car sales. All manufacturerss factor the warranty into the price of the vehicle. So the full warranty's "paid for". One owner or ten owners... if the car's warranteed for 50K miles then the odometer reading should be the warranty cut-off. ???? <rj> >> Actually in every dealer meeting that I attended, for just about every brand >> we sold, when I was in retail I suggest the manufacture include a 100,000 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> > Please expand on this; "warranty should only apply to original owner" It was a dumb idea. The warranty should apply to the product, not to the owner. With the number of GM vehicles which first pass through rental service before ending up with a retail customer Mike's idea is double-dumb. John > It was a dumb idea. The warranty should apply to the product, not to > the owner. With the number of GM vehicles which first pass through > rental service before ending up with a retail customer Mike's idea is > double-dumb. > > John The attitudes that Mike often voices are typical of the reasons that many of us dislike and distrust GM and GM products. The fact is the average new vehicle buyer in the US replaces their vehicle with another new vehicle in three or four years, with 45K to 60K on the clock. The manufacture gets nothing from used car buyers, why offer them a warranty? Used car dealers should offer the warranty. mike hunt >>> Actually in every dealer meeting that I attended, for just about every >>> brand we sold, when I was in retail I suggest the manufacture include a [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > John > The fact is the average new vehicle buyer in the US replaces their vehicle > with another new vehicle in three or four years, with 45K to 60K on the > clock. The manufacture gets nothing from used car buyers, why offer them a > warranty? Used car dealers should offer the warranty. > > mike hunt More BS from Mike. If the used car value doesn't hold up, the new car price and sales won't either. Well said! Al >> The fact is the average new vehicle buyer in the US replaces their >> vehicle [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > If the used car value doesn't hold up, the new car price and sales > won't either. Manufactures sell NEW cars, used car dealers sell USED cars. I love used car buyers, then do help keep my costs down. I rarely trade my vehicles, I sell then off myself and save a lot of money in the process. Just last month I sold my 2005 and bought a 2007, of the same model, for a total outlay of only $3,500 Now if I can only find buyers that can only afforded used clothing and furniture, I could save my wife a lot of money as well ;) . mike >> The fact is the average new vehicle buyer in the US replaces their >> vehicle [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > If the used car value doesn't hold up, the new car price and sales > won't either. > On 9/8/2006 12:22 PM ... Mike Hunter wrote: > Manufactures sell NEW cars, used car dealers sell USED cars. I love used [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >> If the used car value doesn't hold up, the new car price and sales >> won't either. Having the ability to transfer the warranty adds value to the used car you're selling (thus is more likely to command more $$$ on average). Why would you want to shortchange yourself by eliminating the ability to transfer the warranty? > The fact is the average new vehicle buyer in the US replaces their vehicle > with another new vehicle in three or four years, with 45K to 60K on the > clock. The manufacture gets nothing from used car buyers, why offer them > a warranty? Used car dealers should offer the warranty. If Hyundai can offer 100k, surely GM, Ford, and Chrysler should be able to. Why not? Is the product good or not? I drive my cars 150k or more so it is a factor in my decision. I do know a couple of people that bought Hyundai over other brands because of ht warranty. Even as a used buyer, the factory warranty is a selling point. Making used GM cars popular keeps resale value up and helps in the long run. My boss bought a Lexus. He traded in his Caddy for it. What will he buy next? He says probably not a Caddy because of the resale value compared to the Lexus. Las May be bought his wife anAvalon for that reason. Yes, thee is real monetary reasons to offer long term satisfaction with the brand. GM dealers also sell used cars. It is a bonus for them to be able to offer the factory warranty. . One reason US car makers are having problems is the thinking for selling a car today, while the Japanese think long term and have made very loyal customers in a much shorter time than the US makers ever have. You forget to say in my opinion. GM and Ford sell more vehicles than any import. Apparently a lot of buyers do not agree with your opinion that imports are superior. I certainly don't agree, after a half dozen Lexus V8s, that they are any better than domestics One reason I stopped buying them was it cost too much to replace a Lexus with another ;) mike >> The fact is the average new vehicle buyer in the US replaces their >> vehicle with another new vehicle in three or four years, with 45K to 60K [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > car today, while the Japanese think long term and have made very loyal > customers in a much shorter time than the US makers ever have. > You forget to say in my opinion. GM and Ford sell more vehicles than any > import. Apparently a lot of buyers do not agree with your opinion that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > mike I didn't say they are better cars,. I did imply that the Japanese have done a better job of promoting brand loyalty in a short time compared to "Big 3". Not true my c.nt! The imports sell more than GM + Ford > GM and Ford sell more vehicles than any > import. General Motors + Ford 507952 'Toyota + Chrysler Group + Mercedes-Benz + Nissan + Mazda + Porsche' 554501 http://www.caranddriver.com/dailyautoinsider/11585/toyota-and-gm-sales-rise-in-a ugust.html 'General Motors' 156723 + 206798 363521 'Ford' 156175 + 97801 253976 'Chrysler Group' 179165 179165 'Mercedes-Benz' 20602 20602 'Nissan' 89848 89848 'Mazda' 22311 22311 'Porsche' 2397 2397 'General Motors + Ford' 156175 + 97801 + 156175 + 97801 507952 'Toyota + Chrysler Group + Mercedes-Benz + Nissan + Mazda + Porsche' 240178 + 179165 + 20602 + 89848 + 22311+ 2397 554501 > On 9/6/2006 11:05 AM ... John Horner wrote: > I suppose that the Mike Hunters of the world will now say this is a > brilliant move while in the past they have laughed at the idea when I > have suggested it many, many times. > > http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/060906/autos_gm_warranty.html?.v=1 I would prefer more time and less mileage (similar to Chrysler's 7-70 plan). But it's a positive overall. Probably most people will hit the warranty expiration on time, not mileage. So this is effectively a 60K mile warranty for most people. >> http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/060906/autos_gm_warranty.html?.v=1 > > I would prefer more time and less mileage (similar to Chrysler's 7-70 > plan). But it's a positive overall. Probably most people will hit the > warranty expiration on time, not mileage. So this is effectively a 60K > mile warranty for most people. I'd rather the opposite since I drive 25k a year. Pissed me off when my heated seat went during the second winter with 40k on the odometer. > On 9/6/2006 8:24 PM ... Edwin Pawlowski wrote: >>> http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/060906/autos_gm_warranty.html?.v=1 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I'd rather the opposite since I drive 25k a year. Pissed me off when my > heated seat went during the second winter with 40k on the odometer. Your situation is not typical though. But GM's plan is a good fit in your case. >> I'd rather the opposite since I drive 25k a year. Pissed me off >> when my heated seat went during the second winter with 40k on the >> odometer. > > Your situation is not typical though. But GM's plan is a good fit in > your case. How will "GM's plan" be a good fit for someone who experiences a heated seat failure outside of the "bumper to bumper" warranty? GM is simply offering a "powertrain" extended warranty. Most people will be amazed at what "won't" be covered that they "imagine" ought to be covered. Ian "shiden_kai" <V-L-M@hotma1l.com> wrote in message > How will "GM's plan" be a good fit for someone who experiences > a heated seat failure outside of the "bumper to bumper" warranty? > GM is simply offering a "powertrain" extended warranty. Most > people will be amazed at what "won't" be covered that they > "imagine" ought to be covered. True, but it would be covered under the now longer bumper to bumper. Some things should be covered for time, not miles anyway. Non moving parts are usually not affected at all by the number of miles driven. If, say, the sun visor fell off after only one year, but beyond 36,000 Miles, that seems difficult to say you "drove it too far" so it broke. >I suppose that the Mike Hunters of the world will now say this is a >brilliant move while in the past they have laughed at the idea when I have >suggested it many, many times. > > http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/060906/autos_gm_warranty.html?.v=1 This is nothing new. They had those kind of warranties for a while back in the 80's I believe (we hated them). Plus, certain GM vehicles already have the 5 year/100,000 klm warranties in our neck of the woods. Pushing the warranty to 160,000 klms for five years will mean almost nothing to the majority of uses as they will simply not rack up that many miles in five years. Cavaliers have had the extended powertrain warranty for a few years now, all the Olds vehicles had it. Powertrain warranties are usually hardly used anyway these days. I can see it being useful in the case of transmissions, "and" the intake gasket problems, but GM already warranties the 3.4 intake gaskets for 5 years, 100,000 kilometers and sometimes even longer anyway. Yeah, it's a hidden style of warranty, but it's there. GM probably feels comfortable that their recent changes in engine design will mean that they will have very few repairs to deal with. Ian >I suppose that the Mike Hunters of the world will now say this is a >brilliant move while in the past they have laughed at the idea when I >have suggested it many, many times. > >http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/060906/autos_gm_warranty.html?.v=1 Big f.cking deal. My 2004 Express van with 4700 miles needs a whole new booster/PS unit and a new front cover gasket. Repair is going to put me out of business for 3 days. f.ck you GM. If Toyota or Nissan had an equivalent vehicle I never would have bought this piece of sh.t. And these ignorant cocksuckers like Mycunt wonder why. Other opinions? Blow me. Your momma did. That was your sister down there, my mother died in 1945 ;) mike >>I suppose that the Mike Hunters of the world will now say this is a >>brilliant move while in the past they have laughed at the idea when I [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > And these ignorant cocksuckers like Mycunt wonder why. > Other opinions? Blow me. Your momma did. >> I suppose that the Mike Hunters of the world will now say this is a >> brilliant move while in the past they have laughed at the idea when I [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > And these ignorant cocksuckers like Mycunt wonder why. > Other opinions? Blow me. Your momma did. I wonder how the Dodge/Mercedes Sprinter vans are holding up for people. That is the first really modern utility van design to be sold in the US for decades. John > On 9/9/2006 11:55 PM ... John Horner wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > John Interesting question. I've seen quite a few of them lately. Might be too new to know yet. >I suppose that the Mike Hunters of the world will now say this is a >brilliant move while in the past they have laughed at the idea when I >have suggested it many, many times. > >http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/060906/autos_gm_warranty.html?.v=1 Too little, too late. It will take 10 years of building cars worth owning for the stench that is on GM to diminish. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.