Camaro 1968 327 Base Model Low Miles Classis 1 Owner #s Matching No Reserv on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM sees 'strong year' in 2018, then gold in Chevy Silverado for 2019

DETROIT — General Motors said on Tuesday it expects earnings in 2018 to be largely flat compared with 2017, but that profits should pick up pace in 2019 as its revamped line of high-margin pickup trucks hits the U.S. market. The 2018 earnings outlook was above market expectations, sending GM shares up more than 3 percent in premarket trading. "GM had a very good 2017 as we continued to transform our company to be more focused, resilient and profitable," GM Chief Executive Mary Barra said in a statement. "We are positioned for another strong year in 2018 and an even better one in 2019." GM and its Detroit rivals, Ford and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, are bringing on new trucks at a time when overall U.S. new vehicle sales have been falling, but truck sales continue to grow as consumers abandon passenger cars in favor of pickups, SUVs and crossovers. GM on Saturday fired a new round in the battle for profits from one of the U.S. auto industry's most lucrative segments when it showed a new generation of its Chevrolet Silverado pickup truck at the Detroit auto show. The new Silverado, a highlight of the event, is the successor to GM's best-selling vehicle in North America. Sales of the current Silverado rose nearly 2 percent to 585,000 vehicles in 2017. In the coming months, the company will also reveal a revamped GMC Sierra pickup truck. U.S. new vehicle sales fell 2 percent in 2017 after hitting a record high in 2016, and are expected to drop further in 2018 as interest rates rise and more late-model used cars return to dealer lots to compete with new ones. GM said on Tuesday that while it retools a factory in Ft. Wayne, Indiana, to make the new pickup trucks, it will shift some production to an Oshawa, Ontario, plant in order to avoid missing sales in a hot market for the vehicles. The No. 1 U.S. automaker said it will record a $7 billion non-cash charge for its fourth-quarter 2017 earnings related to deferred tax assets. GM said it expects capital expenditure in 2018 of around $8.5 billion, about $1 billion of which will go toward funding self-driving car technology. Last week, the company said it is seeking U.S. government approval for a fully autonomous car — one without a steering wheel, brake pedal or accelerator pedal — to enter the automaker's first commercial ride-sharing fleet in 2019. GM said it expects 2017 earnings per share at the high end of its previously forecast range of $6 to $6.50.

Mark Reuss: GM can't afford product 'misses,' has 'thought about' CT6 V-Series

Mark Reuss is a busy man. He oversees General Motors' global product portfolio, an all-encompassing task for a company that sold more than 9.9 million cars and trucks last year. When GM launches a well-received product, like the road-going rocket ship that is the Chevrolet Corvette Z06 – he gets credit. When the company stumbles with the slow-selling Chevy Malibu or grapples with fallout from the decade-old Saturn Ion and its flawed ignition switch, he gets blamed. GM owners, the press and sometimes the federal government, demand answers. Bob Lutz famously held the job before Reuss. So did Mary Barra, who's now GM's chief executive. There's a New GM, but the lineage is connected to a long history. When he's not thinking product, Reuss, an executive vice president, also runs the purchasing and supply chain for the company, which is still one of the largest industrial empires in the world. We caught up with Reuss on the floor of the New York Auto Show, where GM had just rolled out two crucial new products: the 2016 Cadillac CT6 and the 2016 Chevrolet Malibu. Speaking with a small group of reporters, Reuss delved into a variety of subjects, including the new Malibu, Cadillac's future (he thinks the ATS-V is going to "flame the M3 and M4"), and other topics. On fixing the Malibu: "We can't miss. We can't have those kinds of misses [like the previous generation] on our cars and crossovers and trucks. We can't do that. If we do that, we give a reason for someone to go buy something else. It's that simple. "On a car like the Malibu we have a chance to really fix all of that, which we have, and then lead. Then you've got a real opportunity there. So that's what we've really been focused on here – to fix those things." He later added: "We need that car here to transform Chevrolet desperately because it's the heart of the market. And when you think of Chevrolet, people will come back and think about what we did with the [new] Malibu and the Cruze... It's hugely important to us." On Cadillac: "If we go out and try and out-German the Germans, it's probably not going to work. We've got an opportunity here generationally where there's a lot of people younger than me that have parents that drove BMWs and Mercedes, and I think there's an opportunity there for those people to drive something different than what their parents did, and I think that's always been an opportunity in the auto industry if you look at the history of it.

Full-size trucks are the best and worst vehicles in America

You don’t need me to tell you that Americans love pickup trucks. And the bigger the truck, the more likely it seems to be seen as an object of desire. Monthly and yearly sales charts are something of a broken record; track one is the Ford F-Series, followed by the Chevy Silverado, RamÂ’s line of haulers, and somewhere not far down the line, the GMC Sierra. The big Japanese players fall in place a bit further below — not that thereÂ’s anything wrong with a hundred thousand Toyota Tundra sales — and one-size-smaller trucks like the Toyota Tacoma, Ford Ranger and Chevy Colorado have proven awfully popular, too. Along with their sales numbers, the average cost of new trucks has similarly been on the rise. Now, I donÂ’t pretend to have the right to tell people what they should or shouldnÂ’t buy with their own money. But I just canÂ’t wrap my head around why a growing number of Americans are choosing to spend huge sums of money on super luxurious pickup trucks. Let me first say I do understand the appeal. People like nice things, after all. I know I do. I myself am willing to spend way more than the average American on all sorts of discretionary things, from wine and liquor to cameras and lenses. IÂ’ve even spent my own money on vehicles that I donÂ’t need but want anyway. A certain vintage VW camper van certainly qualifies. I also currently own a big, inefficient SUV with a 454-cubic-inch big block V8. So if your answer to the question IÂ’m posing here is that youÂ’re willing to pay the better part of a hundred grand on a chromed-out and leather-lined pickup simply because you want to, then by all means — not that you need my permission — go buy one. The part I donÂ’t understand is this: Why wouldn't you, as a rational person, rather split your garage in half? On one side would sit a nice car that is quiet, rides and handles equally well and gets above average fuel mileage. Maybe it has a few hundred gasoline-fueled horsepower, or heck, maybe itÂ’s electric. On the other side (or even outside) is parked a decent pickup truck. One that can tow 10,000 pounds, haul something near a ton in the bed, and has all the goodies most Americans want in their cars, like cruise control, power windows and locks, keyless entry, and a decent infotainment screen.