General Motors will reward buyers of gas-guzzling SUVs,
By on May 24th, 2006 at 2:17 pm
General Motors will reward buyers of gas-guzzling SUVs,
capping gas prices for SUV drivers in Florida and California at $1.99 a gallon by offering monthly credits. Eligible cars include the Hummer H2, the Chevrolet Tahoe and the GMC Yukon — three vehicles that average 15 miles per gallon.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Hannity
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Maddow
McCain
Media
Military
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Ride out the age of the gasoline engine as long as possible.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:26 pmI wonder what loopholes the fine print includes. I’m sure there’s a per-month max credit, plus probably other sneeky bits.
I never understood why people seem to fall for this and other “rebate” scam variations. If the company plays a rebate game, there’s some point to them not offering you the post-rebate price without the bells and whistles. And whatever that reason is, they ain’t doing it for your benefit.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:27 pmAnother imaginative move by GM. The creativity GM has just never ceases to amaze.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:27 pm(sarcasm off now).
This reminds me of the Pinto fiasco of the 70’s. Cheaper in the short term, but deadly in the long term. I guess we had better get use to the fact that the US will no longer manufacture anything in the next ens years.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:27 pmThe only loophole is that the buyers would have to sign up for On-Star, which people who buy these big pieces of shit normally get anyways.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:29 pmThe real God(s) of the far right – Stcokholders.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:29 pm#2,
Exactly right. The reality is, it’s probably so much of a pain in the ass, it would be worth the lack of stress and waisting of time just to pay full price for gas.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:30 pmGood to see GM is shooting holes in the side of the titanic
May 24th, 2006 at 2:30 pmThe other day I saw a Hummer pulling a boat–how many MPG do you think they were getting, 5?
May 24th, 2006 at 2:31 pmIf you actually NEED a vehicle that weighs almost 10,000 lbs. and can tow a yacht, you should buy a DIESEL. Otherwise, WTF are you driving such an overpriced, low-tech behemoth? Oh, cause they got them big-ass seats for bloated fat-ass Americans.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:31 pmGM is experiencing such massive losses that this isn’t really a surprise. Even @ 1.99 a gallon I would imagine they will still turn a profit on the SUVs. Their margin on SUVs in general (there’s no breakdown that’s very accurate for these vehicles – but would be higher than the next number) is 4,000/vehicle. In contrast, they lose money on their other vehicles (read: cars).
The H2 is being terminated as I recall in favor of the H3, right? Anyway, it would be nice if GM started scaling back on SUVs but that’s not likely as they are the only profitable segment. This is particularly the case since GM sold off a controlling interest in GMAC recently which deprives them of the cashflow that GMAC generated for them (which was covering their losses).
Then there’s the Delphi issue where GM is going to suffer deeply – either in massive termination buyouts or a crippling strike that would disrupt their supplies.
GM’s problem, imho, is that they build cars no one wants. That’s because they focused all their R&D on the gas guzzling pieces of garbage.
Oh – Toyota is about to overtake GM as the largest carmaker in the world. I guess companies that produce what consumers want end up getting rewarded.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:32 pm#5 Spudge,
Very funny, I live in AZ, it’s a GM/Ford/Dodge kind of state. I always wonder if the owners have ever discovered that they baught junk. The On-Star thing always struck me as a way to gather marketing information.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:34 pmThe other day I saw a Hummer pulling a boat–how many MPG do you think they were getting, 5?
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
That would be HWY mileage at best.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:34 pmOtherwise, WTF are you driving such an overpriced, low-tech behemoth?
Comment by DieNowForPeace — May 24, 2006 @ 2:31 pm
Small winkies… :)
May 24th, 2006 at 2:36 pmGee why hasn’t Toyota offered an “On-Star” type option, because it’s worthless and stupid. GM has to play on peoples basic fears to sell the crappy option.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:38 pmThe other day I saw a Hummer pulling a boat–how many MPG do you think they were getting, 5?
Comment by Jane E. Schneider
That always cracks me up. Down here in Tejas you see a lot of motor homes. I crack up when I see them towing a SUV. I”m thinking part of the big 29 set!!!
May 24th, 2006 at 2:38 pmThe On-Star thing always struck me as a way to gather marketing information.
Comment by For Truth — May 24, 2006 @ 2:34 pm
A couple months ago there was an online article about the government using vehicle tracking systems in cars.. I was thinking it might have been the one time this year W actually reads a newspaper article for the information.. I mean inspiration.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:39 pmThey happen to be 3 of their vehicles that they can still fairly easily turn a profit on, not an easy accomplishment for american autos. There’s a good deal of expense tacked on to all vehicles of the ‘big 3′ for workers insurance, pensions, etc.
I’m not familiar with all the details of the gas-cap plan, so I can’t comment much on it.
The large suv’s are still very popular in the mid-west, and any area with heavy semi traffic — but not because people don’t care about the price of gas, or the environment — but because of safety. Getting hit by a semi is not a rare event, nor a pretty one.
It is a fact that if ethanol(I believe it’s E10, too lazy, busy actually to check) were readily available for sale in fueling stations, that most *all* vehicles could run on it. Even the big suv’s.
No, this is nothing like the Pinto fiasco, where the general safety and welfare of the public was deliberately concealed.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:41 pmDown here in Tejas you see a lot of motor homes. I crack up when I see them towing a SUV. IՉ۪m thinking part of the big 29 set!!!
Comment by Jules — May 24, 2006 @ 2:38 pm
Last year when I was driving cross country – I saw those things everywhere. I started calling the camp grounds ‘mobile subdivisions’ because they were. No more tents. The only time you’d see the lardasses unload from them was to set out the satellite t.v. dish or walk the yippie dog. I was appalled.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:42 pm“I never understood why people seem to fall for this and other “rebate†scam variations. If the company plays a rebate game, there’s some point to them not offering you the post-rebate price without the bells and whistles. And whatever that reason is, they ain’t doing it for your benefit.”
The rebate ’scam’ is that without offering it GM couldn’t sell the car. Toyota and Honda don’t have to offer rebates to sell cars – their largest incentives to date are around 590 dollars/vehicle compared to the several thousand the US companies have to offer.
The reason they don’t deduct the rebate cost first is because it’s an accounting gimmick. GM sells cars to the dealers at a discount to the sticker price but one that is above the rebate price. Because they book it as a sale at this sticker price they are able to artificially boost their income at the end of the year when the cars delivered then won’t have rebate expenses until the next year. Of course they do record a liability during the same year (just as they record liabilities for future warranty expenses that are higher than the Japanese carmakers) but that’s not exactly what they’re interested in reporting.
The secondary reason is that Americans are ’stupid’ enough (especially these SUV lovers:)) to believe that they are somehow getting a ‘deal’. When it’s an uncommon rebate, yes, they are. When it’s normal business practice they are not.
Incidentally I own a VW Jetta TDI and was pretty unhappy when the lowsulfur requirement was waived by Bush. I also use biodiesel often as I am in an agricultural region with pump stations. I am looking forward to the VW Diesel hybrid that they are no promising to deliver in the next few years (they wouldn’t consider it for the longest time).
As for electric vehicles they aren’t what americans ‘want’ at present because of their range. As for the hybrids they mostly capture wasted energy by the gas engines. The electric only (and the next generation ‘plug ins’) are problematic because they 1.) require power plants and 2.) the increased demand for power would lead to a need for more power plants. I would imagine that would be an excuse for justifying nuclear power plants to be built. It would also lead to expansion of coal plants since the economics are good for them right now:(
May 24th, 2006 at 2:42 pmSMELLS LIKE DESPERATION TO ME.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:42 pmToyota, just like with the Prius, is once again ahead of the American automakers. Toyota is realising a new car called the Yaris, which is small and economical. I just looked it up on CarsDirect.com and they have it listed for $1,000 over MSRP, because they are in such high demand. The same thing goes for Honda. They are realising a car called the Fit. Same thing. For some reason, US automakers didn’t learn in the ’70s and they aren’t learning now. Regular old Americans no longer want giant SUVs. They want economy cars.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:43 pmEverytime I see a post or article like this it really makes me shake my head. Go ahead and buy Toyota’s and Honda’s and such. Maybe you can pull a few wheelchairs out from under some elderly folks whilst you’re all at it.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:45 pmWhat does this have to do with GM making bad business descisions?
May 24th, 2006 at 2:49 pmI wonder how many shares of Exxon-Mobil the GM exec that made this decision has.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:53 pmMaybe you can pull a few wheelchairs out from under some elderly folks whilst you’re all at it.
“What does this have to do with GM making bad business descisions? ”
If you don’t know, perhaps you shouldn’t be so judgemental of the big 3.
“I wonder how many shares of Exxon-Mobil the GM exec that made this decision has.”
Another completely illogical thought.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:57 pmAlso, and FYI, the corporate heads of the big 3 were all in DC this past week to discuss the industry, and in particular ethanol fuel. As I said, vehicles[at least the newer ones] can run on e10. Simple changes in fuel injection systems of other vehicles can have them quickly ready to run on e10. why aren’t we using it?
Republican incumbents are far more likely than their colleagues in Congress to receive oil company money, RAW STORY has found.
Eighty four percent of the $8.6 million oil and gas companies have contributed to the 2006 elections has gone to Republicans, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
According to data compiled by the Center, the top 20 recipients of oil money in Congress are all Republicans.
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Republicans_incumbents_receive_large_majority_of_0524.html
*THAT’S* why.
May 24th, 2006 at 3:09 pmAnother completely illogical thought.
Comment by Desi — May 24, 2006 @ 2:57 pm
As is both of your posts Desi. The big 3 placed their eggs in the SUV market. Back when Gas was a little over a dollar a gallon or so, this was not a big deal to most american consumers. With gas prices over $3.00 a gallon consumers are taking a hard look at the mpg of the vehicles they drive.
Also check out consumer reports, and Car and Driver magazine. Domestic cars in the US routinely have low to middle reliability. Toyota, and Honda however generally score from upper middle to high end. If the big 3 produced reliable cars, with good gas mileage, they would not be facing thier current crisis. You should actually be applauding Toyota, this is after all the free market at work.
May 24th, 2006 at 3:12 pmAs is both of your posts Desi. The big 3 placed their eggs in the SUV market. Back when Gas was a little over a dollar a gallon or so, this was not a big deal to most american consumers. With gas prices over $3.00 a gallon consumers are taking a hard look at the mpg of the vehicles they drive.
Also check out consumer reports, and Car and Driver magazine. Domestic cars in the US routinely have low to middle reliability. Toyota, and Honda however generally score from upper middle to high end. If the big 3 produced reliable cars, with good gas mileage, they would not be facing thier current crisis. You should actually be applauding Toyota, this is after all the free market at work.
=====
krazny,
I’m an engineer in the auto industry, and you don’t know a thing about the current ‘crisis’ in the industry. They don’t get into that in ‘car and driver.’
One down-side to being a dem for me, is the thousands of mindless auto posts from people with no more information than what they read in some car and driver magazine.
applauding toyota? christalmighty, I bet you don’t shop at walmart though, eh?
May 24th, 2006 at 3:19 pm“Another completely illogical thought.”
Comment by Desi — May 24, 2006 @
Coming from the guy who just posted this:
Getting hit by a semi is not a rare event, nor a pretty one.”
I’d take it as a compliment.
Boy you must have some BAD drivers in your neck of the backwoods, if they keep getting hit over and over again.
May 24th, 2006 at 3:21 pmThis just in from Captain Obvious:
People who drive SUVs are supporting terrorism.
May 24th, 2006 at 3:23 pmkrazny,
I’m an engineer in the auto industry, and you don’t know a thing about the current ‘crisis’ in the industry. They don’t get into that in ‘car and driver.’
Desi
And I’m Space Ranger Bob, scourge of the Space Terrorists!
It’s fun to play dress-up!
May 24th, 2006 at 3:23 pmNow you’re all starting to sound like the fan club at little green footballs. Is that really the image you want to project?
You kids don’t get out nearly enough.
I live in metro-detroit, what do you think most of the people here do for a living? Well, for now anyways.
May 24th, 2006 at 3:29 pmDear Think Progress,
Please, get more intelligent trolls.
Thanks.
May 24th, 2006 at 3:31 pmKraz,
I drive Honda cuz the mileage is great, but…
http://www.autoblog.com/2005/10/24/toyotas-environmental-image-takes-a-beating/
it’s the gasoline engine and it’s heroine-like need for petroleum – follow the money.
May 24th, 2006 at 3:32 pmapplauding toyota? christalmighty, I bet you don’t shop at walmart though, eh?
Hate to break it to you Desi but if you buy products from Wal-Mart there is a pretty high chance that that prodsuct wasn’t Made In America. Buying from Wal-Mart actually hurts the US job market. But from your logic since you are a car engineer you probably don’t read the financial news to realize this.
May 24th, 2006 at 3:33 pmHate to break it to you Desi but if you buy products from Wal-Mart there is a pretty high chance that that prodsuct wasn’t Made In America. Buying from Wal-Mart actually hurts the US job market. But from your logic since you are a car engineer you probably don’t read the financial news to realize this.
Comment by dlet — May 24, 2006 @ 3:33 pm
I *do not* shop at walmart. Reading comprehension is the key. Good day, strange people.
May 24th, 2006 at 3:38 pmDesi,
my wife is from detroit, and she has family there, around Ann Arbor really. We visited last thanksgiving it was nice. When she heard about the Wixom plant closing she nearly burst into tears. Alot of her friends from high school either worked there, or thier parents did. If you care to enlighten us in about the crisis in the American Auto industry I am all ears. I didn’t point to Car and Driver, or consumer reports as a newssource for the big three. I instead brought to your attention, that the top cars in those magazines for reliabiity and gas mileage are foreign. you posted some inane statements indirectly attacking anyone who doesn’t by a domestic car as unpatriotic. And something about pulling wheelchairs out from under old people. If you wish to contribute something besides snark please do so.
As for the big 3 simply put, if you produce a flawed product, don’t be suprised when noone buys.
and for the record I do not shop at wal-mart. The goods they sell are even shoddier then a Ford Focus.
May 24th, 2006 at 3:40 pmOK, why do people like Desi come to think progess? He does not sound like a troll but he certainly is as strange as one.
May 24th, 2006 at 3:40 pmReading comprehension is the key.
Writing things that can be understood helps too.
Other than that, for the state that GM is in its a little strange that they would bribe people to purchase their product. As was stated many times in this post they should concentrate on making products that are needed. I have a Taurus that I bought used and with care have about 197,000 miles on it. I buy used cars cause it is better than people throwing them away. More pollution in making a new car than using an older model till it dies. I don’t need to use but four to five times a month. Also check out the SmartCar if you are looking for a fuel efficient car. They have a four seater now and its made by Chrysler-Dailmer. Not available in the US yet(of course…too good on gas probably) but they sell it in Canada(damn progressives..lol). When my car goes thats what I am looking at.
May 24th, 2006 at 3:53 pmI have to wonder how long the big three can stay in business. The lose $1500 on each car out the door, and now they have to subsidize the fuel costs? If I were a member of the UAW I would start learning new vocation.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:08 pmMost of Toyota’s domestic US product is made in the US. They even ship overseas from here. Engines were primarily built in Japan until a few years ago, they are now moving that over here. Transmissions are next. The reason for this process is that the dollar is slipping so fast against other currencies that they have no other choice. The opposite caused Texas Instruments to build facilities in Great Britain during the 50’s.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:13 pmMeanwhile, the big 3 is in the lead towards moving jobs to Canada because the medical care situation in the states is in a shambles and they are in arrears in their US pensions. The medical problems have begun to influence manufacturers like Honda, Toyota and Nissan to look more favorably towards Canada.
Krazny,
If y’all are really interested, I’ll check my web-site later for some of my old posts. Usually, they get pretty much ignored so I seldom discuss them.
I understand people want the best quality for the lowest price, it’s difficult to reconcile however, with the fact that the big 3 are paying the good wages, the pensions, and the health care for the majority of americans. They also have among them the most liberal hiring/benefits practices — minorities, gays, etc. — things Dems stand for.
Also, please note that no one says a word to my info on ethanol fuel and how most autos could currently run on it if it was available, and those that can’t could easily be switched over.
And, just fyi, I’m a ’she’.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:17 pmAdding to WaltTheMan’s post, Honda produces all American Civics, Accords, and Oddysey’s in the USA. Their even looking to build new plants in Ohio or Indiana for new models currently build in Japan. I’d say they are creating quite a few more jobs for Americans than the Big 3.
Link to a story on the new plant
May 24th, 2006 at 4:20 pmNo doubt GM has an oil company or three willing to subsidize their marketing venture for the extra dollar that a gallon of gas costs the average driver.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:20 pmDrivers of SUV’s do support the reasons behind the terrorism of disgruntled middle easterners.
They seem to be afraid of a lot of things as well, besides ‘terrists’, like rain, snow, heat , cold, drivers of small cars, animals crossing the road, the dark…….
and , I was once told,
>” the bigger the car, the faster they come”
( being a guy who drives agile, nimble and dapper little pickup trucks which enable me to get in and out of tight and sometimes delightfully sticky places, I have no evidence to support the preceding anecdote.
I also get no complaints.)
Hey Desi,
The big three are not as “made in America” as you think. Chevy started buying steel from japan, instead of Bethlehem Steel, in the 70’s. Toyota makes and assembles much of it’s US sold product right here.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:21 pmHell no. All they do is ruin small companies and under pay their employees.
Why don’t you post a comment that makes sense. You are the strange one here. We point out why American automakers are in trouble and you say we are unpatriotic.
For you dumbass information I drive a Ford jerk.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:23 pmDesi, Engineer for one of the big 3. That explains a lot.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:25 pmDesi,
I agree with you on the idea of using ethanol. Anything that can be done to reduce dependancy on foriegn oil is an a+ in my book. I know that GM and I believe Ford already market cars in Brazil that run on the E-85. I would like to see that expanded to the US market. The hardest piece of the alternative fuels market, will be to get the oil companies to start selling e-85 at the pump. If it was widely available, I sure as hell would switch my car over to run on it. Why spend $3.30 when I can spend $1.20.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:29 pmDesi
It is a shame about what has happend to US auto makers but it is not all of the union workers fault. Do they share blame…absolutely, but if management could be trusted to do what was in the best interest for all concerned, meaning shareholders AND workers, then this problem would never have arisen. Workers hear so many times about executive compensation that hey believe if they take cuts it will only go into management pockets.
Personally, I love ford. Right now I drive a Honda…hate it and cannot wait to get rid of it. My husband and daughter drive fords and I eventually will have another one. However, it will not be an SUV!
May 24th, 2006 at 4:29 pmGee why hasn’t Toyota offered an “On-Star†type option, because it’s worthless and stupid. GM has to play on peoples basic fears to sell the crappy option.
Comment by For Truth — May 24, 2006 @ 2:38 pm
As one who has worked for USAC (United States Auto Club) answering calls from members who need…directions, a tire change, a few gallons of gas, a locksmith, or an ambulance because they’ve just been in an accident, I wouldn’t necessarily classify On-Star as a crappy option. What they are selling is piece of mind.
Say your child has accidentally been locked in a car in 90 degree weather and is unable to unlock it himself. I’ve dealt with situations like that. Would you like to wait 30 minutes for a locksmith to get there, wait 10 minutes for the fire department to arrive and let them break the window, or call On-Star and have them remotely unlock the car within minutes?
Say your RV has broken down on the side of the interstate, this time in July and in 98 degree weather, and you can’t run the A/C. You have no cell phone and your only hope is that a police car or good samaritan passes by to assist. Would you like to leave your wife and 6 month old child in the hot sun and walk a few miles to a pay phone, or just hit the On-Star button and have someone on the line almost immediately? Again, I’ve spoken with USAC members in just this situation.
How about this one: you are driving a 2-lane country road in an unfamiliar state and you get a flat tire. The only landmarks you have are an old barn about 2 miles back…and that distance is just a guess. There are no houses or no cross roads or any other landmarks in sight…something we USAC reps had to ask from a member. You know you are heading towards one city, but you don’t know how far you’ve traveled from the one you just left. You can only guess. Oh…and you don’t know the number or name of the road you are on. Do you know how difficult this makes it for a USAC rep to get help to you? Now as I understand it, On-Star can use GPS to pinpoint your location.
Oh, and you’ve heard those On-Star commercials in which the On-Star operator asks the customer if they wanted them to stay on the line until help arrives? It’s not just fluff. On every call a USAC rep took, before any other piece of information was taken from the member, we had to confirm whether or not the member was in a safe situation. We also offered to, yep, stay on the line with the customer if they didn’t feel safe. Not much we could do if something drastic happened, but it did offer piece of mind.
Next time think before you type.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:37 pmANybody else notice how odd it is that an engineer for one of the big 3 doesn’t know that ethanol is e-85? Desi keeps calling e-10.
Could that be the real problem with the big three, they have engineers that are so out of touch that they don’t know what alternative fuels are out there.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:38 pmFYI — e-10 is used in Canada and is 10% ethanol.
Maybe people who work for the Big 3 deserve more credit.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:40 pmOur ‘02 Dodge Caravan is built to run on E85 fuel. Most Voyagers/Caravans built from ‘99 through ‘03 with the 3.3L V6 had this capability. After being restricted to fleets only, it’s once again available on ‘06 models too.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:42 pmOur ‘02 Dodge Caravan is built to run on E85 fuel. Most Voyagers/Caravans built from ‘99 through ‘03 with the 3.3L V6 had this capability. After being restricted to fleets only during ‘04 and ‘05, it’s once again available for retail sales on ‘06 models.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:42 pmThe big three don’t spudge, E-85 is sold in Brazil next to gas and deseil. GM has been marketing the flex fuel cars down there for a while.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:44 pmVirtually any gasoline-powered car will run just fine on E10 (10% ethanol). It was popular in the midwest as far back as the 1970s. I ran it in my ‘74 Gremlin for years.
E85 is 85% ethanol. There are several models of domestic makes that are built to run on E85. I know for sure many Dodge/Chrysler minivans are built this way–I’ve got one of ‘em. I’ve also seen Ford Tauruses (Tauri?) equipped for E85 compatibility.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:46 pmWC,
That was a great commercial break. Commercials are everywhere now. They just did a live commercial before the musical “Stomp” yesterday and now a commercial on TP. Thats it I’m moving to the mountains….
I do agree with you On-Star isn’t a “crappy” option. Electric windows and locks….now there are some lazy stupid options that are the first things to break down.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:50 pmPartial listing of vehicles with E85 compatibility:
4.7L Dodge Durango
4.7L Dodge Ram Pickup 1500 Series
2.7L Dodge Stratus Sedan
2.7L Chrysler Sebring Sedan
3.3L Caravan & Grand Caravan SE
3.0L Ford Taurus sedan and wagon (2-valve)
4.6L Ford Crown Victoria (2-valve, excluding taxi and police units)
5.4L Ford F-150 (3-valve. Available in December 2005)
4.6L Lincoln Town Car (2-valve)
5.3L V-8 engine Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra half-ton pickups 2WD & 4WD
5.3L Vortec-engine Avalanche, Suburban, Tahoe, Yukon & Yukon XL
3.5L Chevy Impala (LS, 1LT & 2LT)
3.5L Chevy Monte Carlo (LS and LT models only)
One Mercedes: 2.6L C240 luxury series
One Mazda: 3.0L Selected B3000 pickups (made by Ford with Mazda badge)
One Nissan: 5.6L Titan DOHC V8 engine (pickup & some big honkin’ SUV).
Source: http://www.e85fuel.com/e85101/flexfuelvehicles.php
May 24th, 2006 at 4:58 pmI startedmy Toyota experience with a 2000 Avalon. Five years and 85,000 down the line, I sold it to my son and got a 2005 Prius. Bothe cars are still on the road and the Avalon is at 130,000 miles. The only major service on the Avalon was a precautionary change of the timing belt. It still has the original brake pads (They were last checked in March) and runs like a top. The Prius saves me about $900.00 per year in gas. The only caution that I take is Mobil 1 every 5000 miles. I took an Audi 385,000 miles on that regimine, and Audis are noted for their lack of reliability.
May 24th, 2006 at 4:58 pm#59
If that is the case, it seems like the big three should push e-85 into the market. If I was given a choice between a vehicle that cost $3.00/g to fill and $1.20/g, it’s kind of a no-brainer.
May 24th, 2006 at 5:17 pmno thanks…i’ll pass on the on-star system…..i got a cell phone….that’s a lot of bad situition you seem too get into WC…maybe you should just stay home…the world is a scary place… if i have to worry about all those sort of things happening to me, maybe i’ll stay home
May 24th, 2006 at 5:24 pm# 61–We’ve got some E85 outlets around here (upper midwest). I’m wondering if the alky production just isn’t up to full speed yet, to allow more widespread distribution…
May 24th, 2006 at 5:32 pmtake is Mobil 1 every 5000 miles. I took an Audi 385,000 miles on that regimine, and Audis are noted for their lack of reliability.
Comment by WaltTheMan — May 24, 2006 @ 4:58 pm
I know this will sound extremely stupid, but is that an additive or is it a type of oil you use when changing your oil?
May 24th, 2006 at 5:49 pmDon’t forget the big 3 fought tooth and nail against higher fuel economy standards, and the fuel demands of their gas guzzlers directly contribute to higher gas prices.
May 24th, 2006 at 6:00 pmIts not just the big three who fought the higher fuel standards, most car companies have lobbied against that type of legislation including Toyota.
May 24th, 2006 at 6:10 pmDuring WW2 no one drove, now there giving you credit to drive while they fight the war. Wow!!!
May 24th, 2006 at 6:56 pmHonda didn’t fight the higher standards. Instead, they invented the CVCC engine.
May 24th, 2006 at 7:16 pm#68 – Great THEN, but now Honda and Toyota are both fighting higher CAFE mpg requirements in California, and the CVCC engine… was basically a motorcycle engine (air cooled at that), and nothing more (hardly an “invention”).
May 24th, 2006 at 10:08 pmI know this will sound extremely stupid, but is that an additive or is it a type of oil you use when changing your oil?
Mobil1 is a 100% synthetic motor oil. Much better for your engine than traditional oil. Once you start using synthetic oil, though, you can’t go back to the regular kind – although there’s absolutely no need to.
May 24th, 2006 at 10:13 pmGM had a great electric car program in California until they decided to destroy every one of those cars leased, even though people begged to buy those cars when GM ended their program. Why? Because GM saw more money selling gas guzzling SUVs back then. The only way to become less dependent on Big Oil companies is to force Detroit to abandon gasoline cars and go electric entirely.
May 25th, 2006 at 12:37 ami’m going to try offending as many people as possible in one go! I’m English!
May 25th, 2006 at 4:05 amnow that i’ve lost all your attention. As their name suggest “the big 3″ no doubt have far too much power in the world and most likely want to fill their rather large pockets with as much cash as possible before using alternative fuels.
My suggestion to you all, sod cars you may as well strangle your children (and their children, and their children and … can you see where i’m going) get off your arses, either walk, bike, public transport, or whatever else to where ever you need to go. It’ll save a lot of problems!
Have fun in Americaland!
Yo, British dude? Maybe you didn’t notice, but our country is bigger’n your country. If it was feasible to walk/bike ride everywhere, we prolly would.
May 25th, 2006 at 9:29 amno thanks…i’ll pass on the on-star system…..i got a cell phone….that’s a lot of bad situition you seem too get into WC…maybe you should just stay home…the world is a scary place… if i have to worry about all those sort of things happening to me, maybe i’ll stay home
Comment by danoaudio — May 24, 2006 @ 5:24 pm
Uhhhh…read the post again. I was not in those situations. Members of USAC were. I just took the calls when they called in for roadside assistance. Many used a cell phone, so it’s good that you have one. And I hope you have a good roadside assistance program…I understand that many cell phone companies offer one. I’m just saying that On-Star can be a valuable asset when considering situations that I described.
May 25th, 2006 at 10:04 am#69
What’s funny is that while they are fighting higher mileage standards, in the latest commercials some of the companies have no problem hawking the 30+ mpg that many of their cars get. I believe GM and Toyota are two that do this.
May 25th, 2006 at 10:09 am#70
Mobil1 is a 100% synthetic motor oil. Much better for your engine than traditional oil. Once you start using synthetic oil, though, you can’t go back to the regular kind – although there’s absolutely no need to.
Comment by Shep — May 24, 2006 @ 10:13 pm
Shep…haven’t heard this before. I checked QuakerState’s Web site and they said you could switch.
May 25th, 2006 at 10:37 amDesi are you sure you’re not a guy? you act like one!
May 25th, 2006 at 1:26 pmI can assure everyone here that Desi is not a guy.
I can also assure you she has a very progressive political blog.
May 25th, 2006 at 7:53 pmActually, GM announced they were discontinuing the Hummer H1 which is basically
the civilian version of the Hum-Vee. Hum-Vee’s are produced in by AM General in
Indiana. Since sales of the H1 amounted to only several hundred units per year, it
no longer made sense to continue having AM General produce a federalized, emissions-
compliant version of the Hum-Vee. Versions sold to the military are free of regulation.
Ironically, the H1 was the only diesel vehicle in the Hummer line and GM has no plans
to offer diesel power in their homegrown H2 and H3 models. GM does produce a light
truck diesel, the “Duramax” which is a joint project of GM and Isuzu. It is only available
in 3/4 and 1 ton pickups and apparently production numbers have prevented GM from
offering it in a wider range of vehicles and GM as well as the rest of the industry feel that meeting the emissions requirements for vehicles under 8500 lb. GVW with diesel
power simply aren’t worth the trouble despite the coming low-sulphur mandate and
what appears to be a tremendous pent-up demand for fuel efficient tow vehicles.
….Fred
May 27th, 2006 at 5:13 am