I'm Sick of these Chevy "Gas Friendly to Gas Free" Ads!!

Forget the current Malibu and Aura 'mild' hybrids. They gain almost nothing. They aren't worth discussing. Now when the 2-Mode Malibu/Aura eventually hit the streets in a year or two both will be the equal to the current Camry hybrid. The Fusion hybrid at about the same time will probably be the same.

All of them should be around 35-37 mpg real world....but the Gen 2 TCH should then be cresting 40 mpg still in the lead.

The only one without a midsized hybrid will be Honda, but its Accord clean diesel should be getting about 40 mpg plus as well.

This is all good for all of us.

 

Yeah, I am getting sick of these ads too. Someone ought to publish GM's CAFE fleet numbers compared to say Honda's and Toyota's for a laugh.

As for E85, amazingly, your small state has 2 publicly E85 stations per National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition (NEVC) and E85. My much larger state per National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition (NEVC) and E85 has a whopping 3 publicly accessible E85 stations, which amazing considering there was only 1 for years.

If I had a flex fuel vehicle, I wouldn't relish the idea of driving 190 miles one way to buy E85.

 

Even with gas prices higher and higher every day, I still see people with BRAND NEW full-size SUVs! Are they stupid or something?

Just think of all the wasted steel and other materials that are wasted on every new full-size SUV that is produced TODAY. In five years, they will be sitting on junk yard lots. Those materials could have been used to build two or possibly even three Priuses or Yarises. Sad.

 

The fine print and caveats in the ads are the biggest warning to readers. The ads from GM look simple and straight-forward but the simplicity is marred by all the numbered notes behind each and every sentence.

Here is my own ad:
I am a pretty smart person (Note: if you don't compare me to anyone else in the room). I am good looking (Note: as compared to a bulldog). I have lots of money (Note: Net worth figured in Liberian dollars). I drive a Chevy Volt and averyone stops to look at me when I drive by (Note: the Volt is a fictional vehicle that gets an amazing 100 MPG[estimated] but has never been seen or driven by a non-fictional person).

Wow -- lying gets easier the more you do it and you actually feel like there might be some truth in the BS somewhere so your statements might be justified if at least one person believes in them.

 

Those ads get me really frustrated as well, especially when the devil is in the fine print. I really hope it blows up in GM's face one of these days if the Volt never comes or people start taking them to task. I have already started hearing from numerous radio show hosts how E85/ethanol is not a viable solution, although these shows still have GM Tahoe hybrid ads touting how it gets the same city mpg as a 4-cyl camry (and no mention of highway economy).

It's pretty much simple greenwashing until they come out with a product that is widely available and fuel efficient.

 

That's what you get for reading the Trib:behindsofa:

 

GM's greenwash goes much deeper than these annoying ads. While advertising their "green" products and image, they've also been working behind the scenes to defeat environmental regulations. Greenpeace wrote a nice piece on it here: Greenpeace | Greenwashing

 

Don't forget, with ethanol you get the added benefit of 25% lower MPGs! The Chevy Tahoe get 16mpg on gas, 12mpg on ethanol. Brilliant!

Rob

 

This is the first time I remember reading about a 'real' hybrid from GM (other than the PHEV Volt). Do you have a link from a GM source?

 

Yeah, and those stupid ads are still pushing hydrogen. Idiots.

 

That's very outdated information. GM is no longer going that route. That technology has been focused on powerful vehicles instead. There are no plans to use it in combination with any 4-cylinder engine. Volt marked that changed in direction.

.

 

May be "gas friendly" means it needs a lot of gas now and "to gas free" means it doesn't need gas in the future because no one wants to drive it anymore.

 

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/nvc/edmunds/VehicleComparison?basestyleid=100900433&styleid=100925622&styleid=100900306&styleid=100939057&maxvehicles=5&refid=&op=3&tab=specs

The link above compares the two GM mild hybrids (Aura, Malibu) with the Camry hybrid and Honda Accord . As you can see they are within the same ballpark as each other in size/price/class etc. The Camry gets much better city mpg and is about $1500 more.

I would pick the Camry for a number of reasons but to say that the others are not viable choices would be wrong. I think the GM products are better then the Accord. These (to me) are large vehicles loaded with safety features and 32mpg highway is not bad. All four are five star safety rated in most categories.

The 4cyl Accord gets the worst mpg as it gets 21 city 31 highway.

Purly subjective but its a shame the worst mpg comes from the best looking car. The new Accord is much nicer looking then the Camry or the GM products.

 

Yeah, that's what I wonder too. I see the brand new full-sized SUVs running around too along w/some that are definitely current gen (bought in the last few years) ones. It's pretty clear that most of them don't care about the environment, global warming, other drivers, and our dependence on foreign oil.

I sure hope they don't gripe about gas prices because they have no right to whatsoever in my book.

 

I talk to dudes at work with young children about their choice of vehicles - many of them buy the Tahoes and big minivans in hopes to protect their children better in case of you know what. They just think bigger is safer.

Some say ... don't those Prius' just crumple up in a crash? People like to believe what they want without getting facts.

 

Another reason that corn-based ethanol is NOT the future. It reduces mpg efficiency.

Cycledrum, in virtually all major SUV-vs-car crashes that make it on the ten o'clock news, the passengers in both vehicles are killed or seriously injured. The only time an SUV is going to protect you is when there is a 35mph crash, except you are going to be charged with manslaughter if it is your fault. I wonder if that father ever thought about what it would be like if his children's dad was in prison for life.

 

I think you missed the point. The Malibu/Aura hybrids aren't worth mentioning as hybrids because they don't improve emissions and only improve efficiency by 2mpg. Why pay $1K for 2 more mpg?

I'm not sure of the reasoning of including the Accord if you want to just compare hybrids. However, I do see the point of just getting the Accord if you are looking the Malibu/Aura Hybrid since the Accord would be cheaper, get almost the same fuel economy, and you could have improved emissions.

For article comparison of the TCH, NAH, and SA (by Edmunds) 2007 Hybrid Sedan Comparison Test (and yes, the Aura placed last and wasn't seen as significant competition to TCH or the NAH).

 

Actually YOU missed the point.

I said I would pick the Camry. I am just stating that GM has some viable alternatives. They are not the superior choice but they are not so poor that no one should choose them. Reread what I posted.

 

In the June 2008 National Geographic, GM runs a 6 page ad on their green theme. Buried in the ad/article is this nugget: "[Beth Lowery, vice president for environment, energy, and safety policy at General Motors] echoed a recurring theme at the Forum : We cannot force technology on people. If people are not willing to buy a product, if it is unaffordable, or if we don't give them the right sources of fuel, we won't be doing a thing to reduce carbon overall."

You'd think they'd listen to some of their own top cheeses!