Chevrolet Articles - Autotropolis.com

Chevrolet Equinox, GMC Terrain Boost GM Third-Quarter Results
By : Charles Krome
Date : 11/16/2009

Let's go straight to the bottom line here, shall we? Yes, General Motors claims revenue in the third quarter of 2009 improved by some $4.9 billion compared to the second quarter, as the company lost "only" $261 million (before special items). And operating cash flow was — in theory — in the black to the tune of $3.3 billion. And the General now purports to be sitting on a $42.6 billion pile of cash. And the company is even making noise about how it will start whittling down its government loans with a $1 billion payment next month.

But the most important thing to keep in mind when analyzing these results is that they are not being tallied using ye olde "generally accepted accounting principles." GM, recall, is no longer technically a public company, despite being owned by the U.S. public, so it doesn't have to worry about little things like that. And yet even with this advantage, the company was unable to rejigger its financial results to show anything comparable to Ford's third-quarter profit. I'm not sure if this is a failure of the imagination or something worse.

After all, even Toyota, which has had a relatively GM-esque year so far, claimed a profit in the third quarter, as did Honda, and Nissan was able to spin its losses into "better than expected" results.

Of course, GM has long been known for its rather lackadaisical approach to keeping its books, and this looks to be more of the same. But now more than ever there's just no excuse for it. Considering how much federal aid has been heaped on the General's plate, the company should be crystal clear with its financial reporting, not trying to take advantage of its status as a "privately owned" company to get around U.S. accounting standards.

It's especially frustrating because GM products seem to be gaining momentum in the marketplace, but it's hard to get a handle on how much momentum we're talking about when the financial results seem so hinky.

The General's mid-size crossovers — Chevrolet Equinox, GMC Terrain and Cadillac SRX — are turning in pretty spectacular results. October sales of the Equinox were up 176.9 percent and SRX sales increased 279.6 percent. The Terrain is a new entry, but it still racked up 2,994 sales in October, and if you play the game where you combine the sales of all three, GM's new mid-size crossovers accounted for 14,339 sales. For comparison, the combined October sales of the Ford Escape/Mercury Mariner were at 15,073 units; at Honda, putting together the Honda CR-V and the Acura RDX gets you to 16,619 sales. Simply put, GM is doing a very credible job in this very important segment.

In fact, General Motors recently announced a $90 million (Canadian) investment in the Equinox/Terrain plant — and is bringing back about 150 employees — to boost production of these two vehicles.

Even GM's aging car lineup has to be considered as holding its own: The Chevrolet Impala and Chevrolet Malibu are still among the top 20 best sellers. Not bad at all when you remember the Impala hasn't had a major redesign since 2006 and the current Malibu is already about three years old. Further, for all the buzz around the success of the Ford Fusion, the October sales score was 12,086 for the Chevy (up 11.1 percent) vs. 13,445 for the Ford (up 24.1 percent).

The Chevrolet Camaro debuted to big-time demand, too, moving more than 8,000 units in October. That's a lot of sales for what many considered to be something of a niche product, and, (don't need this comma--could use hyphens before and after numbers) if it continues to deliver these kinds of numbers, the Camaro could easily crack November's top-20 list.

As a result, despite axing four different divisions and going through bankruptcy, GM's third-quarter U.S. market share stayed flat as compared with the company's share in the first half of 2009.

And all of this is before the launch of cars like the Chevrolet Volt, Chevrolet Cruze, Chevrolet Spark, Cadillac CTS Coupe, Cadillac Converj and Buick Regal. All of these vehicles, even the delayed Cruze, should both attract customers and boost consumers' perception of GM overall.

Now, I've generally been a supporter of GM's upper management, but at this stage in the game, the contrast between the company's product/marketing efforts and the way it handled its third-quarter financial "results" is too great to ignore. This is a flat-out management problem, as was GM's mishandling of the Opel situation — not so much for backing out of the sale as for doing it in a way that will put a huge financial burden on the company as it tries to restructure its European division without German help.

So, when it comes to management, I've changed my mind: GM can — and must — do better if it hopes to turn things around in the U.S. market.

Least Fuel-Efficient Vehicles of 2010
By : Jeff Wysaski
Date : 11/13/2009

Most of us would like to think that America's taste in cars has moved past the gas-guzzling monster trucks and SUVs of yore. While it is true that the country's collective self-conscience has shifted to greener pastures, the truth is that there are still plenty of deplorably inefficient vehicles on the road. In fact, the vehicles with the worst fuel efficiency for 2010 barely hit double digits.

Technically, the least fuel-efficient vehicles for 2010 are made by the likes of Ferrari and Lamborghini (the Lambo Murcielago takes the cake with 8 mpg city and 13 mpg highway). However, for this list Autotropolis has decided to stick to large-scale production vehicles. With that in mind, here are the 2010 vehicles with the worst gas mileage:

2010 Jeep Grand Cherokee (SRT8)
(14 mpg combined)
Outfit your 2010 Jeep Grand Cherokee with all-wheel drive and the SRT8 performance package, and you'll cruise along at 12 mpg in the city and 16 mpg on the highway. As with most vehicles on this list, the 2010 Grand Cherokee SRT8 compromises fuel efficiency for power and performance. This decadent SUV teems with a 6.1-liter Hemi V8 engine that outputs 420 horsepower and 420 lb-ft. of torque.
Despite the Jeep's large size, the vehicle screams from 0-to-60 mph in less than five seconds. Base price for the 2010 SRT8 Grand Cherokee is $43,325.
2010 Nissan Titan
(14 mpg combined)

Trucks are notorious for their poor fuel performance. The worst offender this year is the 2010 Nissan Titan. Outfitted with all-drive, the Titan guzzles 12 mpg in the city and 17 mpg on the highway. Fill 'er up with E85 flex fuel, and the EPA estimates 9 mpg in the city and 12 mpg on the highway (10 mpg combined). All that gas goes towards powering a 5.6-liter V8 that musters 317 horsepower and 385 lb-ft. of torque. Unless you need the superior hauling and towing power of the 2010 Titan, steer clear of this completely un-green machine.
2010 HUMMER H3
(14 mpg combined)
The most infamously inefficient vehicle brand once again graces the list of least fuel-efficient vehicles. HUMMER's 2010 H3 and H3T earn as little as 13 mpg in the city and 16 mpg on the highway. Flex-fuel E85 brings those numbers down to 9 mpg city and 12 mpg highway. To achieve those paltry numbers, you'll need to upgrade to the 5.3-liter V-8 engine, which offers 300 horsepower and 320 lb-ft. of torque. While the 2010 HUMMER H3 excels in off-road situations, the price of gasoline these days is enough to make even the biggest off-roader think twice about sitting behind the driver's seat of one of these behemoths.
Mercedes-Benz CL-Class (CL63)
(14 mpg combined)
The Mercedes-Benz CL63 AMG is a car built around the idea of excess. When it comes to superior luxury and performance, this is a good thing. However, all that excess fuel consumption means 11 mpg in the city and 18 mpg on the highway. Of course, this may be unimportant to you if you're looking for a 6.3-liter V-8 that tops out at 518 horsepower and 465 lb-ft. of torque. And, if you're willing to drop a cool $145,200 to own the 2010 CL63 AMG, then you probably won't care too much about your monthly expenditures on gasoline.
2010 GMC Savana/Chevrolet Express
(14 mpg combined)
If you're in the market for a cargo van, then storage capacity or passenger space is likely the most important factor in your buying decision. To acquire all that extra space, you'll have to sacrifice fuel economy. The 2010 GMC Savana and 2010 Chevrolet Express are GM clones that offer as little as 13 mpg in the city and 17 mpg on the highway (when equipped with a 5.3-liter V-8). With E85, those figures drop to 10 mpg city and 13 mpg highway. Of course, competitors like the Ford Econoline Series don't do much better. As such, if you need a full-size van, you're just going to have to get used to the idea of betraying Mother Nature.
2010 Porsche Cayenne
(13 mpg combined)
Porsche has always been known for one thing – performance. And when you pile that legendary performance into a big, opulent SUV, the result is a vehicle that offers as few as 11 mpg in the city and 17 mpg on the highway (GTS models with a manual transmission). The 2010 Porsche Cayenne GTS comes equipped with a 4.8-liter 385-hp V-8 engine. Add in a price tag of more than $70,000, and it's clear that the Cayenne GTS is reserved solely for those who want sports car performance in an SUV package.
2010 Mercedes-Benz M-Class (ML63)
(12 mpg combined)
Mercedes-Benz has two vehicles that tie for the worst fuel efficiency for 2010. The 2010 Mercedes-Benz ML63 AMG is a performance-tuned luxury SUV that competes directly with the Porsche Cayenne. Fuel efficiency is estimated at 11 mpg in the city and 15 mpg on the highway. The 6.3-liter V-8 engine boasts 503-horsepower and 465 lb-ft. of torque. Base price comes in at about $90,000.
2010 Mercedes-Benz G-Class (G55)
(12 mpg combined)
The Mercedes-Benz G55 SUV off-road performer performs just as poorly as the ML63 when it comes to fuel efficiency. A 5.5-liter V-8 engine hums along at 500 horsepower and 516 lb-ft. of torque. All-wheel drive and a 0-to-60 mph time of 5.4 seconds only serve to further deplete the vehicle's fuel efficiency. If you want a high-end luxury vehicle that you can take off the beaten path, then perhaps the 2010 Mercedes-Benz G55 is for you. Otherwise, keep your eyes on the road with a more fuel-efficient option.