2015 Chevy Colorado

[theholycow]

holycow: My first reaction is that I don't see much incentive for him to make that statement if it's not true. Hypothetically speaking, the only conceivable hidden agenda I can think of is to advertise a lower starting MSRP (making the perceived price more attractive). In terms of a foreign-market rationale, it seems unlikely to me that GM would offer m/t in the U.S. just because they do so elsewhere. I think it's common for manufacturers to tailor their offerings for specific markets, unless I am misunderstanding you. As for needing a handy excuse in case m/t flops, I don't see shareholders or the Board giving him a pass based on a comment like that.

Very good analysis. I think that's right on.

[Squint]

There's been a buzz about the new Colorado on the auto enthusiast boards.

If I can get a 4-cyl 4x4 and a manual, this tuck may very well be my next vehicle in a couple of years... months... maybe weeks...

FTFY

[ClutchFork]

I am scared of these new fangled vehicles with computers that jack you around. I want it simple. Will it be offered with a carburetor and a three speed column shifter? Make sure the engine has pushrods too. How about a mechanical clutch linkage? And bias belted tires? Then they'd have themselves a real fine truck.

[watkins]

Pushrods are still very functional and part of modern engines. Your sarcasm fails there.

[ClutchFork]

Pushrods are still very functional and part of modern engines. Your sarcasm fails there.

What can I say, but that I don't want those rubber band and bicycle-chain-driven bump sticks, and I especially don't want those interfering engines where the pistons smack the valves when the rubber band or chain goes pop!

[Rope-Pusher]

holycow: My first reaction is that I don't see much incentive for him to make that statement if it's not true. Hypothetically speaking, the only conceivable hidden agenda I can think of is to advertise a lower starting MSRP (making the perceived price more attractive). In terms of a foreign-market rationale, it seems unlikely to me that GM would offer m/t in the U.S. just because they do so elsewhere. I think it's common for manufacturers to tailor their offerings for specific markets, unless I am misunderstanding you. As for needing a handy excuse in case m/t flops, I don't see shareholders or the Board giving him a pass based on a comment like that.

Very good analysis. I think that's right on.

There is a lot to be sed about advertising a lower base price for Amish models you hope nobody really buys because they actually cost more to produce than their Slushbox bretheren. To quote the hollandaise move "It's a Wonderful Transmission": "Everytime someone pays extra not to be Amish, an executive gets a bonus"

Charging extra for a vehicle that costs less to build has to go down in history as the greatest business decision since adding "Repeat" to the instructions on shampoo bottles.

[Boston Fit]

they actually cost more to produce than their Slushbox bretheren

Interesting; I didn't know that. Why do manual transmissions cost more to produce than automatics?

[Rope-Pusher]

they actually cost more to produce than their Slushbox bretheren

Interesting; I didn't know that. Why do manual transmissions cost more to produce than automatics?

Chiefly, production volumes for transmission components and transmission assemblies favor planetary-geared slushboxes and hence costs to produce those components and assemblies are lower than for Amish components and assemblies.

I wood half liked two half bean a fly on the wall the day that someone first ran the numbers that showed slushbox share of production had risen to the point that it had pushed the cost equation in favor of slushboxes.

Wooden sprise me F N the same could be sed four flat panel vs CRT displays as well.

[Boston Fit]

Chiefly, production volumes for transmission components and transmission assemblies favor planetary-geared slushboxes and hence costs to produce those components and assemblies are lower than for Amish components and assemblies.

Got it. But if not for economies of scale, I take it the opposite would be true and manuals would be cheaper to produce?

[Rope-Pusher]

Chiefly, production volumes for transmission components and transmission assemblies favor planetary-geared slushboxes and hence costs to produce those components and assemblies are lower than for Amish components and assemblies.

Got it. But if not for economies of scale, I take it the opposite would be true and manuals would be cheaper to produce?

If "Ifs" was "Fifths", we'd all be drunk.

Yeah, Seems tummy that Amish transmissions, along with flywheel, clutch disc, clutch cover, release bearing, HCRS, Clutch pedal & external shift system would be less expensive than slushbox transmissions, flex plates, torque converters, external shift system and all them durn electronics if production volumes were equal.

[Boston Fit]

If "Ifs" was "Fifths", we'd all be drunk.

Yeah, Seems tummy that Amish transmissions, along with flywheel, clutch disc, clutch cover, release bearing, HCRS, Clutch pedal & external shift system would be less expensive than slushbox transmissions, flex plates, torque converters, external shift system and all them durn electronics if production volumes were equal.

I will just go ahead and take that as a "yes." Thanks Rope

[ClutchFork]

Chiefly, production volumes for transmission components and transmission assemblies favor planetary-geared slushboxes and hence costs to produce those components and assemblies are lower than for Amish components and assemblies.

They are sellouts. Greedy weak kneed sniveling sycophants. To think that anyone should value money more than truth. Manual transmissions are truth. Automatics lie, and they are pathological liars. Really, has an automatic transmission ever told you the truth?