GM Exec: Chevy Cobalt is "Horrible"

[PREMiERdrum]

Link - Detroit News

While driving a Cobalt, Karl Stracke, vice president of global vehicle engineering, was blunt: "Look at this car, it's horrible. How did this get through so many people."

 

Ok, while we all know that the Cobalt isn't class leading, I wouldn't call it horrible... BUT, even if you DO agree with him, should he really be saying this when the Cruze is still several months away from trickling onto dealer's lots?

 

The group is keenly aware that every auto manufacturer will continue to improve their small cars. While the Honda Civic is the benchmark GM wants to pass, it knows Honda will bring out a new Civic as early as next year as a 2012 model.

 

While looking over his notes, Stephens said the Cruze's ride and handling bettered the current Civic.

 

But Reuss, standing nearby, noted, "We've got to beat the next generation."

[NickF1011]

I wouldn't call it horrible

 

I would. I would go so far as to only call it a lateral move from the dreaded Cavalier which it replaced. I see nowhere that it actually improved anything.

 

As for bad-mouthing it, what harm will it really do? Most of them are likely going to fleets these days anyways.

Edited May 13, 2010 by NickF1011

[aneekr]

Ok, while we all know that the Cobalt isn't class leading, I wouldn't call it horrible... BUT, even if you DO agree with him, should he really be saying this when the Cruze is still several months away from trickling onto dealer's lots?

It's horrible. So awful that my employer's fleet manager once said (somewhat jokingly, somewhat seriously) that if we replaced our existing passenger car fleet with Chevy Cobalts, we could reduce fuel costs dramatically because nobody would drive them much.

 

Credit is due to Karl Stracke for asking perhaps the most sagacious question to come from a GM employee in a long time. It's certainly a dramatic departure from the mendacity that characterizes the company otherwise.

[PREMiERdrum]

I don't see the difference in quality between the Cobalt and the Ranger, and I certainly would object to a Ford exec publicly calling that "horrible." Now, once the Cruze is on the market and we can look back at the Cobalt and say "look how far we've come," I'm all for that. It's just poor form to bash your own product, especially when that car has to remain on the market for another 6 months.

[DC Car Examiner]

The Cobalt isn't a terrible car in all respects. A smooth ride and small engine give it a solid feel. But it's not competitive overall.

 

Chrysler execs had said the same thing about the Sebring and maybe the Caliber a couple of years ago, and while it was truthful, it wasn't the wisest PR move for them either.

[timmm55]

I don't see the difference in quality between the Cobalt and the Ranger, and I certainly would object to a Ford exec publicly calling that "horrible." Now, once the Cruze is on the market and we can look back at the Cobalt and say "look how far we've come," I'm all for that. It's just poor form to bash your own product, especially when that car has to remain on the market for another 6 months.

 

Well, the Ranger is a TRUCK after all. A basic, strippo vehicle for hauling stuff. It's main objective is cargo. Cars are a bit more involved, some utility, but comfort and amenities play a larger role.

 

Wasn't there a Cobalt SS that was pretty good? I looked at a base Cobalt and the aging Focus seemed a lot better.

[PREMiERdrum]

Well, the Ranger is a TRUCK after all. A basic, strippo vehicle for hauling stuff. It's main objective is cargo. Cars are a bit more involved, some utility, but comfort and amenities play a larger role.

 

And some would say that's very similar to the economy car class until recently...

 

Wasn't there a Cobalt SS that was pretty good? I looked at a base Cobalt and the aging Focus seemed a lot better.

The Cobalt SS wasn't too bad. Much better than the SRT-4 at least.

[2b2]

...BUT, even if you DO agree with him, should he really be saying this when the Cruze is still several months away from trickling onto dealer's lots?

I don't care when the Cruze goes on sale,

or what his opinion of the Cobalt is**

but

he shouldn't say what he did

IF HE KEEPS SELLING THE COBALT == "WE SELL JUNK"

 

Silent-Shame is one thing, calling your customers "stupid" publicly is another

 

 

** I really doubt the Cruze will be THAT much better

Edited May 14, 2010 by 2b2

[mustang2]

I don't see the difference in quality between the Cobalt and the Ranger, and I certainly would object to a Ford exec publicly calling that "horrible." Now, once the Cruze is on the market and we can look back at the Cobalt and say "look how far we've come," I'm all for that. It's just poor form to bash your own product, especially when that car has to remain on the market for another 6 months.

Please don't slam the Ranger, it's been quietly doing its job since its '83 model launch with only 1 major redesign. It's a quality product. It's dated but still shows how a compact pickup should be built. As for the Cobalt slam, Ford's Kuzak compared the Taurus' first reincarnation (from the Five Hundred) to Homer Simpson. Jan. 2008. I don't agree but that's what the exec said and Mulally was right there with him.

[nelsonlu]

I don't see the difference in quality between the Cobalt and the Ranger, and I certainly would object to a Ford exec publicly calling that "horrible." Now, once the Cruze is on the market and we can look back at the Cobalt and say "look how far we've come," I'm all for that. It's just poor form to bash your own product, especially when that car has to remain on the market for another 6 months.

 

 

Please don't slam the Ranger, it's been quietly doing its job since its '83 model launch with only 1 major redesign. It's a quality product. It's dated but still shows how a compact pickup should be built. As for the Cobalt slam, Ford's Kuzak compared the Taurus' first reincarnation (from the Five Hundred) to Homer Simpson. Jan. 2008. I don't agree but that's what the exec said and Mulally was right there with him.

 

Plus, another major difference here is that the Ranger's only real competition is the Toyota Tacoma. The Cobalt is in one of the most competitive segments around.

Edited May 14, 2010 by nelsonlu

[V8-X]

I would. I would go so far as to only call it a lateral move from the dreaded Cavalier which it replaced. I see nowhere that it actually improved anything.

 

As for bad-mouthing it, what harm will it really do? Most of them are likely going to fleets these days anyways.

My wife, before we were married, owned both a Cavalier and a Cobolt. Don't ask. Both were horrible vehicles all around. The ride was horrible, motors were underpowered and unreliable, fit/finish was far from decent. Can't think of one good thing to say about those cars.

 

 

I don't see the difference in quality between the Cobalt and the Ranger, and I certainly would object to a Ford exec publicly calling that "horrible." Now, once the Cruze is on the market and we can look back at the Cobalt and say "look how far we've come," I'm all for that. It's just poor form to bash your own product, especially when that car has to remain on the market for another 6 months.

Being I've owned two Rangers from the platform that started in 1993. I can truly say those two Rangers were much better in every aspect than the Cavalier or Colbolt were/are.

[papilgee4evaeva]

I rented a Cobalt LS on our honeymoon four years ago. For what it was back in 2006, it was fairly competent IMO. My only complaint with it was that the steering was entirely too light.

 

Problem is, it got left in the dust very quickly by the competition. We here know how much of a bad idea it is to let a car go six years without refreshing it.

[jpd80]

Cruze is becoming very popular with buyers in the rest of the world, I think GM will turn a corner with it as it becomes their global "Focus". In real terms, it may not be striving to achieve best in class (like the MK III Focus) but it has a great opportunity to get out there and repair some of the product damage caused by previous sub standard vehicles. If GM does a good job of marketing the Cruze and backs it up with good mid and large vehicles on Epsillon II, they may yet win back a lot of customers.

 

It all depends on whether GM really wants to change...

Edited May 15, 2010 by jpd80

[156n3rd]

Where has this buy been since that POS was put onto the roads? No duh, fool. It's crap. And we have read right here in these forums what another POS the Cruze turned out to be. When will everyone realize that GM never has and never will? They cannot comprehend small. Chrysler failed at it too. Ford only gets it now because of the global approach. The crap that GM builds across the Atlantic is better in many cases, but still feels like a cheap Chevy. Wake up America, Chevy knows it small cars is shite.

[jpd80]

Where has this buy been since that POS was put onto the roads? No duh, fool. It's crap. And we have read right here in these forums what another POS the Cruze turned out to be.

Cruze is not on sale in the US yet but it is selling OK elsewhere. It's not the greatest car but it is far far from your POS assessment...

 

I have driven Cruze and believe it to be on par with the current Global Focus...

[NickF1011]

I have driven Cruze and believe it to be on par with the current Global Focus...

 

See any problem with that statement on how well the Cruze will do in North America? It will barely be on sale here before the next generation Focus is launched.

[jpd80]

See any problem with that statement on how well the Cruze will do in North America? It will barely be on sale here before the next generation Focus is launched.

But will buyers perceive the all new Focus as technically better than the Cruze?

The Cruze isn't your usual half baked GM car either, it will get a lot of sales...

[jtstakelin]

Horrible isn't the word.....EPIC FAIL is more like it. My wife HAD to have one in 08. I regret that purchase every day. Abysmal resell value, crap interior, crap exterior, bad MPG, shall I go on? No more government motors for my household!

[156n3rd]

Cruze is not on sale in the US yet but it is selling OK elsewhere. It's not the greatest car but it is far far from your POS assessment...

 

I have driven Cruze and believe it to be on par with the current Global Focus...

Hard to believe since nearly all the reviews on papaer on on the net boohoo it is as poor steering hard riding low typical Chevy.

[NickF1011]

But will buyers perceive the all new Focus as technically better than the Cruze?

 

Yes, yes they will. Because it IS technically better than the Cruze.

 

The Cruze isn't your usual half baked GM car either

 

Not according to some reviews I've seen.

[630land]

GM execs bad mouthing current cars is too dramatic. The Cobalt is just outdated and when it was new, the old managers merely claimed 'It's newer and better than the J body". That was 6 years ago, time to move on. I've rented 4 different Cobalts and the newer ones [2009-10] seemed better built then a 2006.

 

Cruz looks nice, but I think the MK III Focus will kick it's rear!

[156n3rd]

Excuse me for asking but who would rent 4 Cobalts?

[630land]

Within the past 5 years of vacations, did not rent 4 Cobalts at the same time. Usually, rental firms don't have a wide selection of cars to pick from the 'compact' or 'economy' fleets. Don't expect all the 'latest and greatest' cars. Last time it was either a Cobalt or Kia, and in two cases, only the Cobalt 2 door was available for the 'economy' price. Then, they do the 'for $10 a day you can...' upsell.

 

Others rented were Focus or Sentas.

Edited May 25, 2010 by 630land

[156n3rd]

How many Kias or other models have you driven? The proper name in Sentra.