[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by digitalfutur

Some typical trends in this thread that I've seen in other forums about GM.

First, that because your opinion about what, how and which cars GM should care about differs from theirs, that GM is a [insert pejorative(s)] company. Fact: My or your individual opinion about GM does not matter. What matters is the end customers' collective opinion about GM. Fact: GM outsells Ford or Stellantis (FCA) in America, and is more profitable than either. If GM hadn't shifted most of its production to SUVs because that's where the market went, they'd be out of business.

Second, and related to the first, is that CEO Mary Barra is [insert misogynistic comment] because GM has decided not to compete tit-for-that with every performance vehicle Ford and FCA make, when presumably a male CEO (like Ford's and FCA's) would. Fact: Barra's compensation exceeds that of Ford's or FCA's CEOs, because she runs GM better than they run theirs.

Third, that if the Camaro isn't spec'd the way you think it should be, it just ain't a Camaro. So you'll just take your sabots and time-warp back to the good 'ol days when performance cars were performance cars, men were men, and women in the automotive world were useful only for sexist car ads. Fact: 6th gen Camaros, and this site, are about all its iterations, not just the one you prefer. So if the next Camaro is an EV, it'll be here, unless the mods decide otherwise.

In the end, facts with data will trump opinion. All car manufacturers, not just GM, see the trend over the long term...it's EV, not ICE. Not unlike the transition from horse-drawn carriages to ICE that took about 25 years at the turn of the 20th century.

This isn’t even remotely similar to the transition from horse drawn carriages.

First off the fact is EVERYONE could see the benefits of the car, and it would have taken much less than 25 years if a car wasn’t so expensive until the assembly line brought the price down.

Secondly the carriage wasn’t used for or seen as fun or a hobby. The car became a hobby for enthusiasts instantly, with people trying to figure out how to make them faster or handle better the second they came out. The chariot scene in Ben Hur was not something that really happened in every little town on a daily basis. The very second people got their hands on a car this little thing called racing began all over Europe and America.

And just because the trend says whatever you say it says, doesn’t mean we should be forced to buy it.

F that. It’s not just about opinion, it’s about being forced to take it or leave it with people who have your attitude about it.

This crap is exactly what makes revolutions happen. Seriously.

[ShansGen6]

I wasn't a fan of the electric car thing until my car was at the dealer for service and I was given a bolt as my loaner vehicle. I was pretty impressed with it. If GM offered an electric Camaro that didn't look like a$$ or a 4 door SUV I would buy one. I would miss the exhaust sound but the benefits out way that for me. I am on the east coast so brown outs and such aren't really a factor.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

This isn’t even remotely similar to the transition from horse drawn carriages.

First off the fact is EVERYONE could see the benefits of the car, and it would have taken much less than 25 years if a car wasn’t so expensive until the assembly line brought the price down.

How would you possibly know that at the turn of the 20th century “...EVERYONE could see the benefits of the car...”? There were comments made about safety as well as what would happen when these newfangled machines spooked the horses. I’m guessing you’re looking at it through 2021 filters, not 1899 filters.

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

Secondly the carriage wasn’t used for or seen as fun or a hobby. The car became a hobby for enthusiasts instantly, with people trying to figure out how to make them faster or handle better the second they came out. The chariot scene in Ben Hur was not something that really happened in every little town on a daily basis. The very second people got their hands on a car this little thing called racing began all over Europe and America.

Ever hear of Harness Racing? Been around at least since the mid-1800s. The primary sanctioning body was born in 1871 and still exists today. The sport has actually seen growth in the past couple decades. The premise? Downsize and lightweight a carriage, attach to a powerful horse, and race around an oval. Sound familiar? They copied the NASCAR model.. except they did it first. And are still doing it

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

And just because the trend says whatever you say it says, doesn’t mean we should be forced to buy it.

Regardless of how the news spins what’s going on in California, Maine, and Washington state, there are no laws on anybody’s books forcing anybody to buy anything. These executive orders require the regulatory bodies in those states to come back at a predescribed time with legislation aimed at doing that. The regulatory bodies very well could come back with modifications to the EO or with a reply that it cannot be done or would not be wise to do so. Time will tell. Just remember that in 1990 California did pass a law that by 2003(?) any automaker selling vehicles in California had to have at least 10% of those vehicles be zero emission vehicles. How’d that turn out? They changed the law multiple times to align with reality. And that 10%...where are we now, 18 years beyond that “deadline”? Zooming along at about 3%.

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

F that. It’s not just about opinion, it’s about being forced to take it or leave it with people who have your attitude about it.

This crap is exactly what makes revolutions happen. Seriously.

Keep your powder dry and let nature and common sense run their course.

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by ShansGen6

I wasn't a fan of the electric car thing until my car was at the dealer for service and I was given a bolt as my loaner vehicle. I was pretty impressed with it. If GM offered an electric Camaro that didn't look like a$$ or a 4 door SUV I would buy one. I would miss the exhaust sound but the benefits out way that for me. I am on the east coast so brown outs and such aren't really a factor.

If they gave me a Bolt as a loaner I’d love to return it LS swapped

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

How would you possibly know that at the turn of the 20th century “...EVERYONE could see the benefits of the car...”? There were comments made about safety as well as what would happen when these newfangled machines spooked the horses. I’m guessing you’re looking at it through 2021 filters, not 1899 filters.

Ever hear of Harness Racing? Been around at least since the mid-1800s. The primary sanctioning body was born in 1871 and still exists today. The sport has actually seen growth in the past couple decades. The premise? Downsize and lightweight a carriage, attach to a powerful horse, and race around an oval. Sound familiar? They copied the NASCAR model.. except they did it first. And are still doing it


Regardless of how the news spins what’s going on in California, Maine, and Washington state, there are no laws on anybody’s books forcing anybody to buy anything. These executive orders require the regulatory bodies in those states to come back at a predescribed time with legislation aimed at doing that. The regulatory bodies very well could come back with modifications to the EO or with a reply that it cannot be done or would not be wise to do so. Time will tell. Just remember that in 1990 California did pass a law that by 2003(?) any automaker selling vehicles in California had to have at least 10% of those vehicles be zero emission vehicles. How’d that turn out? They changed the law multiple times to align with reality. And that 10%...where are we now, 18 years beyond that “deadline”? Zooming along at about 3%.



Keep your powder dry and let nature and common sense run their course.

The only reason the car took 25 years to become mainstream is because it was so expensive to begin with. There may have been a couple people questioning their “horseless-ness” or safety but in 1899 kids would have had posters of a Winton on their bedroom walls - and their Dads would have had one in the driveway and kicked that stupid horse to the pasture - if he could only afford one!

Sure harness racing was around longer than auto racing - but once cars came along the popularity exploded way past what harness racing ever was. The very first auto races were using the horse racetracks, and they very quickly discovered there were nowhere near enough seats for attendance demand once the cars showed up.

And I’m not talking about EOs. I’m talking about CAFE standards and how they really need to be rolled back.

Oh yeah, and I’m not a misogynist. Don’t care what sex a CEO is. But I do care what side of the aisle they sit on, and not just for obvious car stuff. Any CEO should be staunch letter between q and s, and she most definitely is not.

[90503]

Originally Posted by digitalfutur

Some typical trends in this thread that I've seen in other forums about GM.

First, that because your opinion about what, how and which cars GM should care about differs from theirs, that GM is a [insert pejorative(s)] company. Fact: My or your individual opinion about GM does not matter. What matters is the end customers' collective opinion about GM. Fact: GM outsells Ford or Stellantis (FCA) in America, and is more profitable than either. If GM hadn't shifted most of its production to SUVs because that's where the market went, they'd be out of business.

Second, and related to the first, is that CEO Mary Barra is [insert misogynistic comment] because GM has decided not to compete tit-for-that with every performance vehicle Ford and FCA make, when presumably a male CEO (like Ford's and FCA's) would. Fact: Barra's compensation exceeds that of Ford's or FCA's CEOs, because she runs GM better than they run theirs.

Third, that if the Camaro isn't spec'd the way you think it should be, it just ain't a Camaro. So you'll just take your sabots and time-warp back to the good 'ol days when performance cars were performance cars, men were men, and women in the automotive world were useful only for sexist car ads. Fact: 6th gen Camaros, and this site, are about all its iterations, not just the one you prefer. So if the next Camaro is an EV, it'll be here, unless the mods decide otherwise.

In the end, facts with data will trump opinion. All car manufacturers, not just GM, see the trend over the long term...it's EV, not ICE. Not unlike the transition from horse-drawn carriages to ICE that took about 25 years at the turn of the 20th century.

Oh, I see. If you want the Camaro to remain ICE, the woke eco-mob is triggered and then only an EV compliant narrative is the correct one.

Wholesale derogatory judgement on anyone pro ICE is then acceptable. You can probably work in more woke platitudes as time goes on. Isn't that the real point?

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

The only reason the car took 25 years to become mainstream is because it was so expensive to begin with. There may have been a couple people questioning their “horseless-ness” or safety but in 1899 kids would have had posters of a Winton on their bedroom walls - and their Dads would have had one in the driveway and kicked that stupid horse to the pasture - if he could only afford one!

You are still assuming what was in the brains of people who were dealing with the transition back then with no data or facts to support or contradict. You are projecting how YOU would have dealt with it. Totally not valid for that time frame.

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

Sure harness racing was around longer than auto racing - but once cars came along the popularity exploded way past what harness racing ever was. The very first auto races were using the horse racetracks, and they very quickly discovered there were nowhere near enough seats for attendance demand once the cars showed up.

And I’m not talking about EOs. I’m talking about CAFE standards and how they really need to be rolled back.

US fuel economy standards are significantly more lax than any developed country, including China. The only countries with more lax regulations are in South America and Africa. And they are also on the verge of change to embrace European standards or something similar. But then, I guess they don’t know what they’re talking about either.

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

Oh yeah, and I’m not a misogynist. Don’t care what sex a CEO is. But I do care what side of the aisle they sit on, and not just for obvious car stuff. Any CEO should be staunch letter between q and s, and she most definitely is not.

I’ll just assume that the above was in response to someone else. I never referred to you as a misogynist nor did I mention Mary Barra in any of my comments. For the record, I think Mary is doing an excellent job managing the company. Her recently announced compensation for 2020 seems to indicate that GM’s Board of Directors seems to share that sentiment. I may not agree with all of the product directions GM is taking, but the CEO’s job is to hear out the product plans of their product leaders and either approve them or send them back for adjustment. They don’t make them up on their own (Elon Musk being the exception).

Mary’s job is to run the business, and for all intents and purposes, GM’s business is doing better than most other automakers. Definitely compared to Ford and Stellantis.

As far as D or R, personally, I am neither and it’s very unlikely that I will ever fully align with either party. I know you didn’t ask, I’m just volunteering the info. I am a staunch independent. Every checkbox on every ballot for me is based on which of the individuals in question will do more for the country, my state, and my neighborhood, regardless of whether they ride a donkey or an elephant. I also believe that political party has next to nothing to do with an individual’s capability to run a company. There are savants and idiots on both sides of the aisle.

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

You are still assuming what was in the brains of people who were dealing with the transition back then with no data or facts to support or contradict. You are projecting how YOU would have dealt with it. Totally not valid for that time frame.


US fuel economy standards are significantly more lax than any developed country, including China. The only countries with more lax regulations are in South America and Africa. And they are also on the verge of change to embrace European standards or something similar. But then, I guess they don’t know what they’re talking about either.


I’ll just assume that the above was in response to someone else. I never referred to you as a misogynist nor did I mention Mary Barra in any of my comments. For the record, I think Mary is doing an excellent job managing the company. Her recently announced compensation for 2020 seems to indicate that GM’s Board of Directors seems to share that sentiment. I may not agree with all of the product directions GM is taking, but the CEO’s job is to hear out the product plans of their product leaders and either approve them or send them back for adjustment. They don’t make them up on their own (Elon Musk being the exception).

Mary’s job is to run the business, and for all intents and purposes, GM’s business is doing better than most other automakers. Definitely compared to Ford and Stellantis.

As far as D or R, personally, I am neither and it’s very unlikely that I will ever fully align with either party. I know you didn’t ask, I’m just volunteering the info. I am a staunch independent. Every checkbox on every ballot for me is based on which of the individuals in question will do more for the country, my state, and my neighborhood, regardless of whether they ride a donkey or an elephant. I also believe that political party has next to nothing to do with an individual’s capability to run a company. There are savants and idiots on both sides of the aisle.

We are NOT Europe, nor should we try to be. I don’t give a crap how they do things. This is America, we need to worry about our country first and foremost. In fact, if you’re American the USA should be the ONLY country you care about. There are PLENTY of things we need to put our money and efforts to long before emulating European standards for anything.

And saying you’re a staunch independent is a cheap cop out for not having true heart, conviction, and will power to stand firmly for something. If you want to be Switzerland fine, just don’t tell me we should be doing anything Europe does.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

We are NOT Europe, nor should we try to be. I don’t give a crap how they do things. This is America, we need to worry about our country first and foremost. In fact, if you’re American the USA should be the ONLY country you care about. There are PLENTY of things we need to put our money and efforts to long before emulating European standards for anything.

Isolationism didn’t work in the 1930s and it isn’t going to work in the 2020s. Funny thing about weather and climate. Regions tend to affect other regions. Winds blowing from the Bering Strait impact summer in the Midwest. It tends to not give a shit about man made borders. Nobody said America is following Europe’s emissions standards. We clearly are not and there is no indication that we will. I did mention that some countries in South America and Africa are leaning that way. Not because they wanna be like Europe, but more because Europe has already done the heavy lifting so why re-invent the wheel?

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

And saying you’re a staunch independent is a cheap cop out for not having true heart, conviction, and will power to stand firmly for something. If you want to be Switzerland fine, just don’t tell me we should be doing anything Europe does.

Au contraire mon frere. The reason I am and will continue to be a staunch independent is because neither side has full ownership of great ideas or bullshit scams. Both parties have plenty of both and I owe nothing to either party. I don’t choose to support a policy just because a Republican supports it or just because a Democrat supports it. Does it make sense is my measuring point. Who benefits and at the cost of whom? I am far from Switzerland on the principles I hold dear.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

And saying you’re a staunch independent is a cheap cop out for not having true heart, conviction, and will power to stand firmly for something. If you want to be Switzerland fine, just don’t tell me we should be doing anything Europe does.

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Au contraire mon frere. The reason I am and will continue to be a staunch independent is because neither side has full ownership of great ideas or bullshit scams. Both parties have plenty of both and I owe nothing to either party. I don’t choose to support a policy just because a Republican supports it or just because a Democrat supports it. Does it make sense is my measuring point. Who benefits and at the cost of whom? I am far from Switzerland on the principles I hold dear.

I usually agree with you, Petrol Head, but this one I'd give to James. The identity and integrity of these parties is temporal and never fully aligned with the true, lasting values you and I and many others profess. Granted, party leanings are usually very obvious and changes in these is slow, but there is definitely some diversity of quality and integrity on either side, I think it's best to continuously reevaluate our political allegiances in view of the actual candidates and their proposed solutions at hand.

Let's not go overboard, especially based on each other's online (read: somewhat detached from actual reality) forum contributions.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

US fuel economy standards are significantly more lax than any developed country, including China.

I have to ask how much of that 'significant laxness' is coming from the fact that larger vehicles - SUVs, vans, and trucks - are allowed to meet lower mpg targets than smaller vehicles using footprint based methodology.


Norm

[Bhobbs]

The change from horse to automobile was a natural progression in technology.

The change from gasoline to electric is not. I have yet to see any evidence that electric cars have a lower environmental impact that gasoline cars. Just like the Paris Accords, this is nothing more than political grandstanding that will produce no real world results. CO2 production in the US is declining year over year. Meanwhile, China is in the process of tripling it’s number of coal power plants.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by 90503

Today's enthusiast wants to buy a smart-phone or a lap-top with a car attached to it.

That would make today's enthusiasts "technology enthusiasts" rather than "car enthusiasts" specifically. Even claiming to be a car enthusiast doesn't necessarily imply that one is a "driving enthusiast".

To an old guy like me, it's rather sad that so many people see cars as little more than another room to sit in while they stay connected with, and served by, technology. Used to be your car was one of the best ways to get a change of pace.


Norm

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by raptor5244

This is pretty accurate, which is why Tesla can’t build them fast enough. It will take more than just electrifying the vehicles, the software and user interface will be critical to the success. Most people that buy Tesla are drawn to the tech. They love the big screen with Netflix theater, streaming audio, google earth maps, live traffic. They like the sentry alarm system that records video from all 6 cameras if anyone approaches the car. Built in dash cam recording, with built in playback viewer. You press a button on the steering wheel and give it voice commands like like you would with Alexa or Siri, navigate home, or lower the temperature 3 degrees or open the glovebox, or play music by Fleetwood Mac.

Like you said, it is more of a computer than a car and the system is responsive and makes traditional infotainment systems feel archaic. Another game changer is over the air software updates. The idea that your car can continue to improve over its lifetime via software is revolutionary. I have seen two 5% power updates, Spotify streaming was added, NAV updates are constantly being updated, voice recognition, Netflix and Hulu, autopilot improvements, driving improvements like true one pedal driving where regen braking will bring the car to a complete stop and apply brake hold, even improvements to to rain sensing wipers algorithm, etc. and the fact that car is managed by an app on your phone. Little features have been added via software along the way like your windows will automatically close if you walk away from the car. You can enable climate protection in case a dog or child was left in the car the AC will keep the cabin cooled. From the app you can see exactly where the car is on a satellite map and how fast it is traveling, etc. The list goes on and on. My point is GM needs to build Camaro that looks great and drives great but in order for them to fully compete they need the software because that will be the differentiator moving forward.

What do any of those things have to do with just driving? Even live traffic has some potential for distraction.

One pedal driving scares me. Especially if you were to have an occasionally-driven car that doesn't have it.

BTW, I'd be a bit careful about praising those 5% power upgrades. It'd be just as easy for an OTA "update" to take 10% away, with or without obvious reason or recourse.


Norm