Why GM Failed In India
CNBC:
Over the last 20 years, the
Indian automotive market has grown from
about 500,000 new passenger cars,
hatchbacks, sedans and utilities to
about 3.5
million in 2018.
The market has an expected compound annual
growth rate of about 5 to
6 percent over the next 10 years.
But, some automakers have struggled
to make it work.
Among them is General
Motors, the largest U.S.
car company. GM stopped selling cars in
India in 2017 after years of
declining market share.
It's a striking move for GM, which
in recent years has also closed
shop in other regions around the
world, as leadership focuses on
maximizing profits and making investments
in new technologies such as
electric power trains
and mobility services.
With a population of more than
1 billion people, India is becoming
one of the world's
largest automotive markets.
The country is poised to surpass
Japan as the world's third biggest
new car market in 2021.
So while there is ample
opportunity for automakers, the Indian
landscape has been particularly difficult
to navigate, especially for
American firms. GM watched its share
of the Indian market erode
steadily over several years, bottoming out
at about one percent in
2016 just before the
automaker pulled out.
So if the Indian market is
growing, why did GM struggle, especially
when GM has been
so successful in China?
To be fair, quite a few automakers
tend to have difficulty in the
Indian market. First of all, India
is a massive country with a
diverse population of roughly 1.3
billion people.
India, I think, we are
definitely a complex market.
The income levels
are quite heterogeneous.
We are divided, actually into
urban India and rural India.
The consumer requirements are actually
different even the needs are
different in both these markets.
There are a few criteria a
mass market automaker ought to meet.
They are fuel efficiency, resale
value, proximity of service stations
and the affordability of parts
and low servicing costs.
I think first thing is price.
We are a country with a
very low per capita income.
Indians are very price sensitive.
But price is not the only factor.
So now the customer also needs
some more value, for example, with
styling elements. And then, I think,
the consumer also wants a global
brand. They want a
brand which is aspirational.
The consumer wants an overall combination of
all P's, you know it may
be product, it may be
price, it may be positioning.
Which makes the things
quite complicated for OEMs.
These might seem pretty attainable,
but many automakers have
struggled to meet these
in the country.
There are a couple of companies who
have managed to crack that code
and there are several more with shares
of the market ranging in size
from small to smaller.
By far, the most successful automaker
in India is the Japanese firm
Suzuki, which alone owns
half the Indian market.
Suzuki has enjoyed something of
a first mover advantage.
It was the first major automaker to
enter India, and it did so
through a joint venture
with Indian manufacturer Maruti.
Suzuki also specializes in highly
fuel efficient vehicles, which are
extremely important in
the Indian market.
After Suzuki, Korean maker Hyundai is
the second largest with 16
percent of the Indian market.
After that, Indian, Japanese and Korean
makers such as Honda, Tata,
Kia and Mahindra all more or less
have equal degrees of market share.
Kia in particular, is a relatively
late coming brand that has been
able to succeed in India.
I think an excellent example is
Kia Motors which recently entered, it
was a new brand and
they gave a great proposition.
They were in an SUV segment and
I think suddenly right from the month
one, we saw a great success
for this OEM, in India.
Then the remaining 10 percent of the
market is made up of others such
as Ford, Renault, BMW and Nissan.
Early on, GM entered the India market
with its Opel brand, a mass
market brand GM had
owned in Europe.
While Opel cars tended to be
affordable, they failed to resonate with
Indian buyers.
I think later on they realized that's
not a brand which is really
going to work well in India because
that was not a value proposition
which they were offering
to their customers.
But then GM introduced its Chevrolet
brand to the country, which
brought it more success.
It was a great success.
They launched a few great
products like Chevrolet Cruze Chevrolet
Beat. They had that start which
they were really looking forward.
Despite these efforts, the automaker had
trouble taking share in the
Indian market. It was the first
automaker to introduce a diesel fuel
powered car of its size.
At the time, the Chevrolet beat
was the smallest diesel powered car
customers could buy in India.
It was a strong proposition and
benefited from a government subsidy
on diesel engines.
But in the end, the
diesel Beat had few takers.
The company may also have made a
misstep by trying to introduce a
low-cost vehicle GM manufactured with
its Chinese partner SAIC called
the Chevrolet Sail.
Their plan got derailed with the
introduction of Sail because I think
they underestimated the consumer aspiration
and then, I think, the
decline started. GM also fell victim
to a kind of self-reinforcing
cycle. One challenge it struggled with
was the lack of an adequate
dealer and servicing network.
More premium brands such as Mercedes
and BMW often attract customers
with the means to travel
further for service and sales.
But, mass market brands such as
GM's Chevrolet are targeting middle
class buyers who value convenience.
Dealerships in India often sell a
single brand so GM's low sales
volumes meant a single dealer might sell
only a handful of cars in a
month and risk taking losses on
the costs of running the business.
In the end, such low market share
made it difficult for GM to justify
maintaining a presence
in the country.
The automaker officially stopped selling
cars in India on December
31, 2017.
GM told CNBC it explored many
options for its India business, but
ultimately withdrew after it
determined the increased investment
originally planned for the country would
not deliver the returns of
other global opportunities.
It continues to operate services
for existing Chevrolet customers in
the country. In September, the
automaker entered a long-term
partnership with Tata Consultancy Services,
which will do engineering
design for GM vehicles meant
for markets around the world.
The move out of India was part
of a larger pullback GM has been
making around the world as
it restructures its business.
We're seeing other automakers follow
suit as they're pruning.
They're pruning the dead branches and
focusing on where they can be
strong. For GM, this is a huge shift
because GM of old used to be all
things to everyone everywhere.
And, it has now decided that
is not the proper strategy.
The automaker told CNBC if it doesn't
see a clear path to leadership
and long term sustained profits in
a particular market, it will look
at opportunities to focus its resources
on areas that will lead to
the greatest results. It added that this
is the same approach it has
taken elsewhere.
The automaker also sold its
European operations to French carmaker
PSA in 2017.
At the time it pulled out of India
GM had two factories there, one in
the Gujarati city of Halol
and another in Talegaon.
The Halol plant was acquired by
MG Motor, the once famed British
brand now owned by Chinese
automaker SAIC Motor Corporation.
GM has a joint venture with
SAIC to produce cars in China.
Reports surfaced in November 2019 that
SAIC is also in talks to
acquire GM's Talegaon plant, along
with fellow Chinese automaker
Great Wall. GM told CNBC it
is exploring strategic options for the
plant. The move out of India was
a retreat for GM and for American
auto industry. Ford is starting
to do the same.
It's trimming some
of its offerings.
Global economy and global auto
market is slowing some.
Certainly true here in the
US, it's true in China.
There's just not enough money to
go around to every single market,
too every single vehicle line.
Look at Daimler and BMW,
they've announced major employee cuts.
But in some ways it might
have been a shrewd move.
The other thing that is happening
in the market that has never
happened before is we are on the
verge of massive disruption of the
industry. You know, we're going to
have a future of electric
vehicles, autonomous vehicles and new
ways to acquire personal
transportation and now
mobility service.
There's all kinds of things.
Nobody knows when that's going to happen
or how it's going to happen,
but it's requiring a
lot of investment.
Companies like GM just can't keep putting
a ton of money into the
future as well as a ton
of money in today's stuff.
While analysts do expect the
Indian automotive market to continue
growing in the foreseeable future, it
did hit a slump in 2019.
Maruti Suzuki sales were growing
until February 2019, but have
slipped every month, year
over year, until October.
Suzuki said in November that the slowing
Indian market was one of the
factors behind the company's falling overall
sales and net income in
its second fiscal quarter.
So I think right now the
market is going through turmoil.
Our economy is struggling and if
we only talk about the automotive
market we are talking about a decline
of minus 14 percent in 2019
calendar year light vehicles.
So obviously this year is the
kind of degrowth happening, which has
not happened in last
two decades, in India.
2020, we are just talking about a
kind of a flat growth but then
going forward, in 2021, '22, '23,
the assumption that our economy
should be back, you know, the
GDP growth rate will start growing
above seven percent. Indian
automotive analysts note the country's
auto industry has to contend
with the relatively recent rise of
mobility services such as ride
hailing. The potential of these
competing technologies is still
unknown, but could affect how
interested in car ownership Indians
remain in the future.
In the end, GM did make some of
the right choices when trying to go
into India. GM was right in
terms of localizing their products
typically for the Indian market, making
it, in line with the taxation
because they were able to save tax.
But, at the end of their day, were
really not able to match with what
the competitors were offering.
If the Indian economy picks back up,
GM may find itself trying to
profitably re-enter the country.
GM's rival Ford, which has been in
India since 1995, said in October
2019 it will create a new
joint venture with Indian manufacturer
Mahindra, which Ford said will help
it develop new products faster
and drive profitable growth.
Why General Motors Left Europe
CNBC:
In 2017, General Motors,
the largest U.S.
automaker with brands known around the
world made perhaps one of
its boldest moves in its history.
It sold its European Opel and
Vauxhall brands to the French
automaker PSA known for brands
such as Peugeot and Citroen.
It was the end of an era
for GM which had first ventured into
Europe nearly 90 years before.
It also marked the end of nearly
two decades of losses for the
brands under GM's stewardship.
GM executives said the deal
would unload a difficult and
struggling business and allow the company
to focus on its more
profitable North American market and free
up cash to make needed
investments in new technologies such
as electric cars and
autonomous driving.
But the move came with risks.
The European new car market is about
as large as that of the
United States and leaving it would
not only hit GM's volume but
also increase its exposure to the
ups and downs of the U.S.
auto market.
The sale of the unit
also racked up huge costs.
GM took a $3.9 billion
loss in 2017 owing
mostly to the $6.2
billion in costs it had to
shell out for the sale.
So why did GM leave?
Did the automaker simply
screw up or fail?
Was it wise to get out of Europe?
And what does it mean for GM's
future and the future of the auto
industry?
The decision actually says a lot about
how difficult it is to be a
global automaker today and the
sometimes subtle ways markets
around the world increasingly favor
local players who can tailor
their products to
specific markets.
In the end GM may have failed
in Europe in part because it just
isn't European.
The numbers show General Motors was
having a rough time on the
continent in the nine years or
so before the divestiture of GM's
European business.
It bled money at the EBIT line
every single year for a total of
about $14 billion in
losses on $208.4
billion dollars in sales it's nine
year weighted loss of 6.9
percent.
EBIT stands for earnings before interest
and taxation and is the
metric GM uses to report
the money its international business
divisions make.
Its worst year during that time
was during the financial crisis in
2009.
Where GM incurred a 15
percent loss of $3.6
billion dollars.
The best year in that period was
2016 where it still had a 1.4
percent loss totaling
about $257 million.
Now that sounds like an improvement
and in absolute terms it was.
But consider that over the same
nine year period GM turned a
profit in North America of
$28 billion on $823.7
point billion in sales.
That's a nine year
weighted gain of 3.4
percent an automaker generally tries to
target an 8 percent EBIT
for any given region and for
the world as a whole.
GM's rival, Ford for example has an
8 percent EBIT target for its
European business.
The automobiles never really
sold well with consumers.
And one of the reasons they
weren't able to achieve profitability
is because what they did sell
were primarily passenger cars and
not the higher margin trucks and SUVs
that they saw a lot of in
the U.S..
So that's that's a
big part of it.
There's also a lot of headwinds that
they faced on the cost side
of the equation with with the
cost of labor, unions, and
also more stringent regulation
particularly from an emissions
standpoint.
So a lot of those reasons are
why they had such mixed results and
from a market share perspective when
they pulled out they were
they only had about 6
to 7 percent market share.
So it wasn't really a
dominant market for them.
And GM was losing ground
during that time to competitors.
Consider that the automaker
had a 9.3
percent share of the European car
market in 2008 but that fell
below 7 percent in 2014 and stayed
there for two years and then
fell again to around
6 percent in 2016.
Meanwhile European competitors seem
to be faring better.
And once GM sold off its
European business its earnings shot up.
The automaker earned a
global EBIT of 9.9
percent in 2017 and 8.4
percent in 2018.
But why was GM struggling in Europe
when it does so well in the
United States and is
even leading U.S.
automakers in China a market that is
by no means easy to do
business in.
One reason is that
Europe is pretty unique.
To be fair to GM it is not
the only automaker that has had trouble
there.
American cars have never been an
easy sell in the European market.
Ford for example has dialed back
its presence in the region.
Gm is not alone
in their struggles.
You see Ford pulling out of
Europe and American cars just never
have really sold very well there.
That market is really dominated
by the big three German
manufacturers and others.
But it's also a
fairly fragmented market.
So they just really were never
able to compete and consumers just
didn't really like their cars.
There were larger economic and political
factors such as the great
recession and tightening emissions
regulations that made it
tougher for companies to
do business there.
Another factor is the
distinctiveness of European tastes.
At the time GM CEO Mary Barra
said 80 percent of the vehicles in
the Opel portfolio didn't share
parts or platforms with those
sold in any of
GM's other markets.
When we look at the portfolio
going forward from a vehicle
perspective or a portfolio perspective
only 20 percent of the
portfolio overlapped with the rest
of the General Motors
portfolio.
So we think the real opportunity
for PSA is to leverage that
Europe specific scale.
That put the company
in a tough position.
Major automakers generally want to
build flexible platforms and
parts that can be used in
a variety of models in different
markets.
This helps them keep costs low
and achieve those highly desired
economies of scale.
There are forces however that make
it difficult to share parts and
platforms.
Automobiles tend to be highly regulated
products and many of the
markets where they are sold
and the regulations can vary
sometimes widely from
region to region.
One example of this is
fuel economy and emissions regulations.
Both the U.S.
and Europe have them.
But they tend to differ and
producing cars to meet each
regulatory regime costs
more money.
It requires that the company engineer
and test every vehicle to
fit every set of rules.
But many industry observers say GM
made a number of missteps over
the years that contributed to
the brand's struggles in Europe.
Opel and Vauxhall are often thought
of as sensible cars but they
do not have the glamorous
reputations of more premium brands.
GM typically sold Opels and Vauxhalls
in high volumes usually to
keep costs low.
But simple supply and demand shows this
has a way of driving down
prices.
And while GM produced a lot of cars
it was hard for it to make
money on the cars it made.
It also introduced its Chevrolet brand
into Europe which had the
effect of undermining sales
of Opel and Vauxhall.
Both brands already had
difficulty distinguishing themselves in
Europe's competitive landscape and
selling highly similar
Chevrolets right next to
them further confused buyers.
Furthermore the company didn't
have the right products.
Opels portfolio was heavily
weighted toward traditional passenger
cars such as
subcompact and sedans.
And the brand missed the boom
in crossover and small SUV sales.
At the end of the day Europe is
a large market but it is a mature
one and does not offer the
opportunities for growth companies can
find in China and other emerging
markets or even the kinds of
opportunity in the U.S..
A lot of it is really reflection
of the economic growth in Europe
relative to China.
You have one of the fastest growing
countries in the world and the
U.S. which is growing stronger a
lot stronger than Europe now.
You know if you look at European
GDP over the last several years
just has really lagged the
North American market in Asia.
China is now the world's largest
car market with 28 million new
vehicles sold in 2018.
That number is likely to continue
to rise as the auto market
continues to grow.
In North America particularly the
United States, is becoming an
ever more profitable market as
consumers turn toward higher
priced crossovers, SUVs,
and pickup trucks.
So GM cut the cord in Europe and
said it would use the money to
focus more on its strong business
selling trucks in North America
while sinking piles of cash
into its investments in electric
vehicles and self-driving cars.
Those aren't cheap aspirations and it may
be a long time before GM
or anyone else makes
money off them.
Meanwhile GM's North American sales
have grown pretty consistently
from 56 billion dollars in 2009
to 113 billion dollars in 2018
according to FactSet.
Meanwhile it was able to sell the
business to Peugeot and a large
automaker that has been successful
focusing on Europe but who
also has plans to
return to the U.S..
They've been very open over the
last few months about their
interest in specifically
Fiat Chrysler.
Which I think they view as a
opportunity to gain a foothold in the
North American market and obviously
you know that company has
said some very well-received brands with
Jeep and a lot of the
new products that
they're introducing.
In a comment to
CNBC, General Motors
said:
Peugeot surprised the industry by saying
it had restored the Opel
and Vauxhall brands to profitability in
part by cutting costs and
introducing new more
profitable models.
Why GM Doesn't Make Good Cars Anymore, What Went Wrong
Scotty Kilmer:
rev up your engines, zack says
Scotty my old family are GM fans, do you
know when GM car started to make them
poorly, my guess would be when they went
bankrupt around 2009, well they started
to make them poorly long before that, even
in the early 2000s they started to make
a lot cheaper stuff, I don't know how
true it is, but I talked to an engineer
and an engineer told me one time that GM
and Ford were going neck to neck and
people thought, Oh GM's are made better
than the Fords and then they did a
little research and GM found out that
they were spending 20% more building
their vehicles and that's why they were
better vehicles back decades ago, well
according to the engineer that I was
talking to, GM looked at and said gee
were spending 20% money more than Ford
building our cars, let's make them
cheaper, so they did and then the quality
went down, I know if it's true or not but
an engineer told me that, but they
have been going but down since the
early 2000s, it's just the nature of the
beast with corporations these days, they
want to make a profit and they want to
make things as cheap as they can and pay
people that make them as little as
possible, so they make more profit for
the corporation that's the way that
things go and sometimes it takes the
wrong turn like GM did and make products
that you don't hold up like they used to,
I learned to drive on a Chevrolet
Biscayne the thing was like a tank it had
a
302 v8 in it and that thing just ran
forever but not the new ones their not made
that wa,y no Oberto says Scotty
I am seriously considering buying the
2019 Land Cruisers, do you consider it to
be
the best quality built SUV I'm aware of
the gas mileage, yes they are for that
kind of a vehicle if you're willing to
spend that kind of money and get that
kind of low gas mileage, they are well build
vehicles my customers with them are all
pretty well happy with them, other than
the horrible gas mileage and if you're
willing to spend that kind of money, they
can last a long time, I got customers
with those thing that have three hundred and
fifty thousand miles on them and they're
still running strong, yeah if you don't
mind spending that kind of money go
right ahead, me I'm too cheap I'd never
spend that kind of money, Rambo ask
Scotty what do you think about me buying
a 2004 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited
all wheel drive with 140,000 miles straight
6 for six grand
from my uncle as a first car,
well first of all some uncle he should
give you the car, now I'm not a Jeep fan
by any stretch of the imagination but
back in 2004 they were building much
better ones than they are today now that
Fiat owns them, that straight six-cylinder
engine can last forever I've seen those
things go 400,000 miles, good engines the
transmission that's an OK transmission
it's not great but it's not totally
horrible, it's a 15 year old Jeep try to
get it for a little bit less than $6,000
see if you can barter it, they can be fun
vehicles to drive around, realize they're
somewhat gas hogs because jeeps are
trucks their high up in the air, their not
aerodynamic or anything but it can be a
fun thing to drive, just try to get it a
little bit of lower, Scotty my SUV keeps
going out of alignment I had new shocks
replaced and no one seems to get the
alignment right, any ideas what as to what
it can be,
here's the thing, front end alignment
work we're talking about thousands of an
inches here thousands of an inches there
it's gotta be a pro who knows what he's
doing, so your best to find a
front-end shop that's all they do, here
in Houston I use cotton brothers front
end, they know what they're doing they
can fix any alignment problem, now the
second thing is, modern vehicles
especially the SUVs they're not like
vehicles when I was young, when I was
young they had all kinds of adjustments
there were like six different
adjustments you could do, today a lot of
times the only adjustment you can do is
the caster and the camber that's it
you can't do anything else, so it might
be that the alignment is off because the
struts bent or an a frame is bent, that's
why you have to start with a really good
front end guy, who knows what he's doing
and does good work you have to start
there, because otherwise all bets are off,
Devon says Scotty and I got a 93
3 liter 4runner, it does 16-17 mile per gallon
on the highway but does five to six in the
city any reason why, I live in Fresno
with hardly any traffic on the streets
Thanks, okay first of all, when you're
driving it in town does it get into top
gear, if you drive it really slow and the
transmission doesn't shift into top
gear, you're gonna get crappy gas mileage
like that, 16 to 17 is what those things
get on a highway, so it's working
normally at highway speed, so I'm
assuming it's not shifting into the top
gear when you're driving in town, go 35
miles an hour count the shifts as it shifts
and it should be into the top gear
if it isn't, you got a problem with your
transmission not shifting into gear
that's about the only thing that would
make sense cuz if you have any other
problem with the vehicle, it's gonna get
horrible gas mileage on the highway too,
the only difference is, it's shifting
into the higher gear on the highway maybe
it's not doing it in town, you should
still get at least 12 or something in
the city not 5 or 6, so if you never want
to miss another one of my new car repair
videos, remember to ring that Bell!
General Motors Expanding Recall Of Chevrolet Trax SUVs
CBS New York:
Discuss: Is General Motors' Policy on DC Quick Charging Slowing Chevrolet Bolt EV Adoption Rates?
Transport Evolved:
It’s the world’s first long-range electric
car costing under forty thousand U.S. dollars,
can travel upwards of two hundred and thirty-eight
miles on a charge (more than three hundred
if you’re good with your right foot), and
is on sale now in certain U.S. markets and
South Korea.
But while the Chevrolet Bolt EV deserves a
place in the history books when it comes to
range versus price, this five-seat compact
electric car isn’t selling as well as some
had hoped.
What’s more, it’s being outsold by the
older, cheaper, less capable Nissan LEAF.
So is the Chevrolet Bolt just not priced right?
Is Nissan undercutting the Bolt EV so much
that people are going for the shorter-range
LEAF instead?
Or is General Motor’s lack of interest in
charging networks hampering the rollout of
this influential plug-in car?
I think it’s the latter -- and I’ll tell
you why next.
Hi there everyone!
It’s Nikki Gordon-Bloomfield from Transport
Evolved, and today I’m here to discuss why
I think sales of the Chevrolet Bolt EV are
being hampered due to a lack of decent DC
quick charging infrastructure across the U.S.
-- and why GM’s lack of interest in supporting
public charging infrastructure, along with
its policy of charging extra for DC quick
charging capabilities on the Bolt EV -- is
not helping.
Launched at the tail end of last year, the
Chevrolet Bolt EV was the first all-electric
car to go on sale with a price tag of less
than forty-thousand U.S. dollars and a real-world
range in excess of two hundred and thirty-eight
miles per charge.
And after a good month of sales in January,
when GM managed a decent number of sales in
the launch markets of California and Oregon,
sales during February and March have been
well… a little flaccid.
Worse still, the Bolt EV has been outsold
by the 107-mile Nissan LEAF, which, ahead
of the debut of the next-generation LEAF this
fall, has been heavily discounted by dealerships
looking to get rid of existing inventory.
But while some point to LEAF discounts as
the reason why the Bolt EV is not selling
as well, and others -- including me -- have
reminded folks that the Bolt EV is still only
available in parts of the U.S. while the LEAF
is available nationwide -- I’m starting
to think that the issue for slow sales lies
elsewhere.
Namely, the lack of decent CCS DC quick charging
infrastructure, and the lack of interest the
GM has in helping expand DC quick charging.
And the fact that GM charges seven hundred
and fifty dollars extra if you want a Bolt
EV that can use a CCS quick charging station.
Right now, according to the U.S. Department
of Energy, there are some one thousand and
fifty eight charging locations across the
U.S. that offer CCS DC quick charging.
That’s the standard used by the Chevrolet
Bolt EV.
There are one thousand five hundred and thirty
charging locations that can make use of the
CHAdeMO DC quick charging standard used by
the Nissan LEAF.
And if you’re interested, there are three
hundred and fifty-two Tesla Supercharger locations
(although each Supercharger site on average
has more stalls than either a CHAdeMO or CCS
site).
What does this all mean?
Well, in short, it means there are far less
places to charge a CCS-compatible car than
there are CHAdeMO.
And while the Bolt EV can travel a lot further
per charge than a current-generation LEAF,
the disparity between the number of charging
stations means that many prospective Bolt
EV customers are put off owning one.
Why?
Well, if there are less CCS quick charging
stations than CHAdeMO charging stations, the
likelihood of not finding a quick charging
station along a specific route or at our destination
is higher if we’re driving a CCS-compatible
Bolt EV than it might be if we’re in a LEAF.
What’s more, there’s less chance of redundancy
-- finding another compatible charging station
within easy reach if things aren’t working
as they should.
We’re creatures of habit.
We don’t like going out of our way to recharge
and we don’t like the idea of being stranded.
If there are few charging stations, even if
our car can travel further, we’re less likely
to want to own it compared to a model that’s
better supported.
Now, I’m making massive generalizations
here and I should also note that charging
infrastructure for CCS cars is catching up
to CHAdeMO, so in the not-too distant future
this shouldn’t be a major issue.
Then there’s the final issue.
While Nissan, and many other automakers are
actively supporting the roll out of DC quick
charging, investing large chunks of cash to
help establish a new fuelling infrastructure,
GM has said publicly that it sees infrastructure
investment as a job for charging providers
and government, not automakers.
Which means that while GM will sell you a
car, it won’t help you fuel that car, something
that BMW, Nissan, Volkswagen and other automakers
have been doing for a long time.
What’s more, these three automakers -- and
others -- have been offering customers incentivized
free charging when they buy a new car, lowering
the cost of ownership dramatically.
Own a Bolt EV and you’re on your own, paying
for charging and hoping that you pick the
right charging networks to be a member of.
If charging networks were already well developed
and widely available, this wouldn’t be an
issue.
But right now, it is.
Do you agree?
Is the Bolt EV losing out because of the charging
network policy of GM?
Or is there some other reason?
Leave your thoughts in the Comments below,
don’t forget to like, comment and subscribe
-- and make sure you hit the notification
bell so you don’t miss a single video.
If you’d like to see more videos from Transport
Evolved, please consider supporting me through
Patreon (there’s a link below and at the
end of this video) and I’ll be back tomorrow
with more clean, green, awesomeness.
Until then, I’m Nikki Gordon-Bloomfield,
thanks for watching and as always, Keep Evolving!
LS Series Oil Pans Moroso Engine Chevrolet Chevy GM Tutorial Overview
JEGS Performance:
When looking to find the optimum oil pan for
your LS1 combination, Moroso has a wide variety
of production pans to accommodate exactly
what it is that you're looking for. The LS1
combination has gone into a wide variety of
vehicles in the short time that they've existed.
Whether it's drag racing, road racing, sand
rail, forward or backwards, we've seen it
all and we've produced pans to accommodate
every one of these combinations.
What I have here is three different combinations
to show you the way that we've gone to design
and build the LS1 oil pans. Unlike the other
oil pans we've shown you earlier, these pans
are not based off of core, they're actually
built from the ground up, which gives us a
lot more latitude at exactly how we are going
to build these things and how we are going
to design them based off capacity, cross-member
clearance, and performance that you're looking
for.
Now the nice thing about an LS motor is that
because it's a skirted block, your stroke,
distance and width is not as big a deal on
choosing an oil pan than it would be on a
traditional big-block or small-block oil pan.
Because the rotating assembly doesn't hang
down very far, for the most part, the rail
width and all that has been taken to accommodation
and you're pretty much set ready to go.
This first pan I'm going to show you is a
steel pan, and you can see that it has a very
short front sump. Squared off, same height
all the way through. This is typically going
to go on in earlier model LS swap that you
would do on let's say a late '60s or early
'70s GM product or such. We've got a regular
squared-off style sump for header clearance,
and on all these pans you're going to see
is our billet aluminum OEM location oil filter
adapter. Now this will take a stock LS filter.
This only bolts on to a Moroso-based oil pan
as our rail has been designed for this to
sandwich on to it, and work either with the
OEM gasket or the Moroso oil pan gasket that
we can provide to you that will work on all
these combinations. These oil pans also come
with an o-ring drain plug, which will pretty
much guarantee no weeping or leakage over
time in multiple removals, and this is a very
nice feature, it works very, very well. This
oil pan just has one simple trap door in it
and a slosh baffle, so it's very good for
just acceleration, drag racing and such. Now
obviously, windage trays and things are available
to build both into these motors to provide
some additional oil performance. But once
again, the rotating assembly sticks up so
far, typically these things are main stud
or pan level mounted accessories.
Now this oil pan, same platform but you can
see it has more of an angled sump to allow
the oil to get back to the sump a lot quicker.
Now typically these are on later model cars
where the cross-member is farther forward.
And you can see we have a T-style sump. What
the T-style sump does, gives us more capacity,
and for two reasons, if there's not a header
clearance issue or you have a very lower clearance
to the ground and the car, we're able to provide
the same amount of capacity in a shorter package.
This oil pan also has our diamond-shaped four-door
baffling system with this piece on it, where
a stock or an aftermarket oil pump pickup
will go into this. And Moroso has a wide variety
of pickups available for these, and in some
cases you're able to use the OEM pickup that
comes on the motor already to work on this,
so it's a very universal platform. This too
also has the stock oil filter location like
we showed you on the other one.
Final pan we want to show you is...this is
a direct replacement for any of the Camaros,
particularly the Copo Camaro for stock eliminator
for NHRA. We're able to take the cast aluminum
pan that came off those motors, develop a
pan that fell within the same parameters of
the stock cast pan and we built this. This
too again has the Moroso oil filter adapter
on it, and it has large capacity available
because again, the corners are more squared
off, and it's about half the weight of the
cast pan, and you could later modify and put
certain things into it if you chose to. This
pan just comes with a simple baffle on it
for use with a stock pickup in windage tray
and gasket.
But with any pan with a Moroso pan, we do
have our custom department and we're always
progressing in other designs to accommodate
what it is exactly that you're looking for.
This gives you an idea of the production pans
that Moroso has for the LS engine setup, and
you can see the different varieties and thought
processes on what it takes to choose an oil
pan that's proper for the car that it's going
into. And ultimately what that car is going
to expect of this thing in performance and
oil control.
If you have any questions, call Moroso Performance
and the Tech line, or go to Moroso.com and
see exactly what we do have to offer, and
the accessories that go with it.
General Motors Executive Vice President Mark Reuss crashes Corvette at Detroit Grand Prix
Click On Detroit | Local 4 | WDIV:
General Motors - Review about 2009 Chevrolet Traverse 2Lt from Zilwaukee, Michigan
Pissed Consumer:
"Will be selling my GM LEMON and will be buying a Ford.Also, on top of the million and one issues I've had, I also have a larger oil leak they refuse to fix."
Please see review #765344 on PissedConsumer.com
GM Expands Chevy Trax SUV Recall
CBS Pittsburgh:
Introducing the Cruise Origin
Cruise:
Every time we get on the road,
we’re faced with tradeoffs…
Convenience or climate?
Speed or safety?
Convenience or climate?
Speed or safety?
But what if we didn’t
have to choose?
What we’re going to show you today is
not an improvement on the car.
It’s completely different, and
it’s what you’d build if there
were no cars.
It’s not a product you buy.
It’s an experience you share.
Meet the Cruise Origin
It is self-driven.
It is all-electric.
It is shared.
It is a production vehicle.
I think the first thing you
notice about this
is that it looks really big.
But it’s actually not any
bigger than a regular car -
it’s just more efficient.
On the Cruise Origin the
doors just do this
which is really cool.
So if you look at the opening
here another thing I want
to point out is
this is 3x more area to get
in and out than on a
normal car.
On the inside, I’ve got a
ridiculous amount of space here.
Basically every seat is like
an extra legroom
seat on an airplane.
This is an engineering
prototype of one of our new
sensors.
We've got 2 of them
on the Origin , up front there.
It can see things that you
won't see. And it will react
faster and more safely to the
things you can see.
The Origin can see
pedestrians at night even if
they're not visible to the
naked eye.
And this is for just one of our
new sensor systems.
Just in the last year alone we
accumulated almost a million
miles
of autonomous driving in
San Francisco. And that's
a lot of mileage.
But what's more important
to us is the data that's
contained within those miles.
If you were to stretch
San Francisco across the entire
continental US
from coast to coast, our
AVs would go from one coast to
the other
from coast to coast, our
AVs would go from one coast to
the other
without even a fender bender.
We have an awesome experience
riding in the Origin as well as
superhuman levels of safety.
and those are two big parts of
the equation. But we’re just as
obsessed with making the Origin
experience as inexpensive as
possible.
Most cars sit parked 95% of the
time, racking up expensive
parking fees
while depreciating in value.
The Cruise Origin will spend
most of its life in motion.
The Cruise Origin will have a
lifespan of well over one
million miles.
And that's at least
6x more than today's
average car.
No doubt what we’ve laid out
here is ambitious.
But we’re moving as fast as
possible to make this happen.
But we’re moving as fast as
possible to make this happen.
And while what you’ve seen
here tonight has focused mostly
on helping people
move through cities
this is just the beginning of
the Origin story.
Posting Komentar
Posting Komentar