GM's quality quandary

[wpbharry]

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...604100374/1014

There they go spouting off on the worth of the JDP Initial Quality Survey again - which means little to nothing. Long-term reports on the '04 Malibu by members of Edmunds with high mileage indicate little to no improvement over the previous generation. LOTS of problems as the odo climbs. Sub-quality parts, again.

The bit on the minivans at least explains to me why the '06 Impala sounds like a bucket of bolts compared to the Malibu/Maxx. It's likely one of those with a lot of carryover parts that don't fit as well.

[asim]

Nice article, stupid CSVs.

[nadepalma]

Source: http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...604100374/1014

GM's quality quandary
Some General Motors vehicles outrank Toyota's, but a few troubled models reinforce a bad reputation GM fights to change
BY MARK PHELAN
April 10, 2006

After General Motors has chased Toyota for more than 20 years, independent quality and reliability surveys finally give GM something to boast about -- but not enough.

The best vehicles GM builds -- models like the Chevrolet Malibu and Tahoe, GMC Yukon and Buick Century -- topped many Toyota models in the respected J.D. Power and Associates initial-quality and long-term dependability studies last year.

"Look at the midsize sedan segment. We own that from a quality perspective," said Bob Ottolini, GM executive director for product development quality. "The Toyota Camry and Honda Accord are below all our recent entries in that segment."

However, while virtually every car and truck Toyota builds gets high marks in influential independent studies like those by J.D. Power and Consumer Reports magazine, a few models with very poor quality -- particularly four minivans that went on sale in 2004 -- torpedoed GM's overall score. Several of the company's most important brands dropped into the category automakers dread and shoppers avoid: below industry average.

If GM can get it right some of the time, why not all the time? Answering that question -- and quickly -- is vital to the company's future as it strives to hold off Toyota, recover from last year's $10.6-billion loss and remain the world's largest automaker.

GM cars -- the Chevrolet Malibu, Malibu Maxx and Impala, Buick Century and Pontiac Grand Prix -- took five of the seven top places among midsize cars in Power's 2005 Initial Quality Study, based on a survey of new-car owners. They finished above the Camry and Accord, both of which have earned sterling reputations for quality and reliability with decades of excellence.

Besides the minivans, GM's vehicles "are doing pretty well," said Neal Oddes, J.D. Power director of product research and analysis. "Across the board, though, the minivans did not launch at all well."

But even a single bad model reinforces the reputation for low quality GM gained in the 1980s, said Chris Denove, coauthor of the new book "Satisfaction: How Every Great Company Listens to the Voice of the Customer."

"The image of GM's vehicles is far worse than the reality," he said. "GM has changed. Some of the best-made vehicles in the world today are being produced by GM. It's paying for the sins of its past."

Denove wrote the book with James D. Power IV of J.D. Power.

"The data show the difference really is perceptual," Denove said. "Every automaker has had some quality glitches. Honda recently had transmission problems, but it got a pass because people expect Hondas to have good quality."

The converse of that is also true, however. Buyers unfamiliar with GM vehicles have come to expect poor quality, and the minivans reinforce the stereotype.

Toyota strives for consistency

Toyota is the industry's benchmark because the quality of its vehicles doesn't vary much from one to the next.

"We strive to get better by reducing variation in our manufacturing," said Kevin Martin, general manager of the quality division at Toyota Motor Manufacturing North America, in Erlanger, Ky. "Everyone can screw in a bolt, but we teach people to recognize when it's misthreaded ... to recognize a fault and keep the problem from ever leaving the factory."

Toyota also benefits from the fact that it has fewer platforms for its vehicles than GM. A platform, or architecture, is a set of parts and systems that form the basis for a range of models. Because Toyota develops fewer architectures, it can spend more time and effort improving each of them. GM has been working for years to reduce the number of architectures it uses. It used to have five architectures for midsize front-wheel-drive sedans, but it has moved to a single platform for all cars like that -- models including the Malibu, Pontiac G6 and Saab 9-3 -- around the world.

Although developing a single top-notch architecture has boosted the quality of many of GM's new models, some vehicles -- notably the minivans -- continue to use old platforms engineered years ago.

"Once GM gets to average reliability on our scores, they seem to take the emphasis off continual improvement," said David Champion, senior director of Consumer Reports' automotive testing center. "We see other manufacturers that are mortified by an average score. It's a different mind-set."

GM takes steps to improve

GM disagrees with that assessment, saying that it has moved from simply fixing things when they break to developing vehicles robust enough to last at least a couple of hundred thousand miles with no defects.

To reach those goals, GM has a more rigorous engineering procedure. Whereas the company used to quit testing vehicles and parts at an arbitrary target, engineers now test them until they fail, and design them to last at least 200,000 miles -- more in the case of vital and expensive parts like engines and transmissions. "We have considerably more vehicles in test fleets now than in the past," Ottolini said. "We're putting 500,000 miles a year on vehicles before they go on sale."

In addition, the company has changed the way it builds vehicles.

"There was a lot of training to build the Malibu," said Raymond Dominguez, an assembly team leader with 36 years' experience at the Fairfax, Kan., plant that builds the Malibu. "The process is a lot better than it used to be. We have carts on rollers to carry heavy parts that we used to have to lift, and electric tools to attach wheels with less mess and strain than the old way."

Lawrence McLuney, another team leader who has been at Fairfax for 36 years, said that "the parts fit a lot better now. The standards are higher today. We're paying more attention now, wearing protectors to cover our belts, rings and watches" so the cars' paint doesn't get scratched.

"The workers here are really proud of the Malibu," McLuney said. "We know we're building a good-quality car."

That's fine for vehicles that are entirely new like the Malibu, Cadillac CTS sport sedan and the Chevrolet Tahoe, GMC Yukon and Cadillac Escalade SUVs that just went on sale, but models like the minivans, which carry over much of their basic engineering from previous vehicles, aren't subject to that painstaking clean-sheet approach.

GM scrimped on minivan development, basing the vehicles on an 8-year-old architecture. The result is a vehicle in which many parts are difficult to install, said Marty Cain, a 29-year veteran who does repair work at the Doraville, Ga., plant that builds the minivans.

"It's a tough vehicle to build," he said. "It's probably been a nightmare for some engineer."

While nearly every assembly-line worker in Fairfax got training to build the new Malibu, minivan assemblers received training only if the part they installed had changed from the old van, said Ernie Burel, a team leader with 29 years' experience at Doraville.

"Some parts fit poorly, and that threw us a curve," he said. "Now we're making our own manuals for how to do each job. It's evolved since the new minivans started" production.

"Every way, we're finding something new."

The vans' low ratings trouble workers at the plant, Cain said.

"It makes you feel bad," he said. "I come in every day wanting to build a good car. I want to leave feeling like I did."

Help may be on the way

Company sources say GM is developing an all-new minivan in its new Lambda family of vehicles that should go on sale around 2008.

GM's major brands are about midway through their vehicle-replacement cycles. That means even if GM gets everything right with its new models, it's saddled with some weak players like the minivans for at least another couple of years.

"I don't understand why one division or platform gets it right and others don't," Champion said. "I have to put it down to management decisions and lack of attention to detail.

"They need the foresight to decide what goes forward, and then they need about seven Bob Lutzes," he said, referring to GM's vice chairman and vehicle-development guru."They need people who will not sign off on a product unless they are committed to making it the best in its class. They need that focus across the line."

In author Denove's opinion, GM needs "to continue to improve their quality, but they also need to become a styling leader so people will want to buy their products even if the quality is perceived as lower. That's what Chrysler did with the 300, and that's how GM can get people into its cars so they can see the quality is fine."

Contact MARK PHELAN at 313-222-6731 or phelan@freepress.com.

Copyright © 2006 Detroit Free

What GM has done to improve quality
1. Accumulate at least 500,000 miles of test-driving with a fleet of 250 or more vehicles in the last 60 days before a new model goes on sale.
2. Reduce the number of architectures GM develops so engineers can devote more time to each family of vehicles.
3. Engineer vehicles and parts to last at least 200,000 miles; engines and transmissions to last 150,000 to 200,000 miles.
4. Use the same assembly process in all factories.
5. Make quality a top criterion for companies looking to sell GM parts.
6. Reduce visible gaps in interior trim and exterior panels.
7. Improve appearance and feel of interior parts.
8. Share parts across multiple model lines to avoid duplicate testing and development.
9. Acquire and analyze real-time data from test vehicles equipped with the OnStar communications system.
10. Get assembly workers' input during development so vehicles are easier to build.
11. Spend more time training assembly workers.

Examples of good and bad for GM

The Malibu, which earned top ratings from J.D. Power's 2005 Initial Quality Study, shows the strides General Motors Corp. has made in quality. But GM's reputation has been hurt by minivans such as the Uplander, which gets poor marks from J.D. Power and Consumer Reports.

Chevrolet Malibu/Malibu Maxx
Midsize sedan
Base price: $16,365
Went on sale: 2003
2005 sales: 203,503
Assembled: Fairfax, Kan.
Awards: 2004 Free Press Car of the Year; J.D. Power Initial Quality Study best in segment; Consumer Reports recommended

Chevrolet Uplander
Minivan
Base price: $19,250
Went on sale: 2004
2005 sales: 72,980
Assembled: Doraville, Ga.

GM workers on the good and bad

In Fairfax, Kan., home of the highly rated Chevrolet Malibu: "There was a lot of training to build the Malibu," said Raymond Dominguez. "The process is a lot better than it used to be."

In Doraville, Ga., home of poorly rated GM minivans: "It's a tough vehicle to build," Marty Cain said of the minivans. "It's probably been a nightmare for some engineer."

Why people bought their cars

CHEVROLET HHR
Daniel Walend, 64, Sheffield Lake, Ohio
"I had a Chevy Silverado. I gave it to my son with 243,000 miles on it. He gave it to his son and it ended up with more than 300,000 miles on it. The truck never had a major part break. The reliability was great. I like the HHR's old-time looks and modern dimensions. The interior is so useful with all the features and storage space, and it's quiet inside."

TOYOTA CAMRY
Chris Allen, 32, Manassas, Va.
"I've owned two Toyotas in the past. Both gave me nothing but stellar service and low cost of ownership. I've owned a Nissan Altima and Pontiac Grand Am, as well. They didn't have the reliability of my Toyotas."

Mark Phelan's picks

GENERAL MOTORS
• Cadillac CTS -- The eye-catching sport sedan made Cadillac a legitimate luxury brand for the first time in decades. Its audacious styling and spirited performance laid the foundation for Cadillac's resurgence.
• Chevrolet HHR -- Cool exterior styling and a carefully thought-out interior combine with an attractive $15,325 base price to keep the HHR flying off dealer lots. 2006 Free Press Car of the Year.
• Chevrolet Tahoe -- The world's best-selling big SUV adds an upscale interior and class-leading fuel economy to its traditional workhorse capability. The new 2007 Tahoe is a hit in its first few months on sale.

TOYOTA
• Scion xB -- The boxy little xB put Toyota's newest brand on the map. The hipster wagon won fans with its $14,030 base price and a long list of accessories that let owners make their xB unique.
• Toyota Tacoma -- Toyota's incredibly durable compact pickups built the brand's reputation in the United States. The midsize Tacoma improves on that foundation with a high-quality interior and a powerful V6.
• Lexus RX 330 -- The best-looking vehicle to come from Toyota's design studios in a decade, the RX is Lexus' best-selling vehicle. Its style, luxury and sophisticated features make it the benchmark in its class.

[FamilyTruckster]

Originally Posted by wpbharry

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...604100374/1014

There they go spouting off on the worth of the JDP Initial Quality Survey again - which means little to nothing. Long-term reports on the '04 Malibu by members of Edmunds with high mileage indicate little to no improvement over the previous generation. LOTS of problems as the odo climbs. Sub-quality parts, again.

The bit on the minivans at least explains to me why the '06 Impala sounds like a bucket of bolts compared to the Malibu/Maxx. It's likely one of those with a lot of carryover parts that don't fit as well.

Reviewers at Edmunds liked the 04 Malibu in the long term test. They only stated the problem was a noise from the brake ped and the power steering motor need replacement. BTW, the previous generation Malibu was a very reliable car as was the previous generation Impala.

Why do you think JDP means nothing? You cannot rely on members at Edmunds any more than you can rely on members at any forum including GMI. You only hear the complaints. What you don't know is that there are many, many more people happy with thier Malibu's. You can't make such an assumption from such a small sample of people. Plus, the consumer reviews at the bottom of the article at Edmunds long term Malibu test showed people do like the Malibu.

[85 2.8 Camaro]

You can't argue with the fact that GM dropped the ball on the new minivans. The interior already looks and feels 10 years old. I am in the market for one, but I might wait until a new platform arrives.

[boblutzfan]

Originally Posted by 85 2.8 Camaro

You can't argue with the fact that GM dropped the ball on the new minivans. The interior already looks and feels 10 years old. I am in the market for one, but I might wait until a new platform arrives.

GM has dropped the ball on many vehicles because they opt to save money instead of designing world class products. There have been a few that have been done right: Corvette, Tahoe, Avalanche, SAAB 9-3 all Escalades and HHR but most have been done half a$$ed: Lucerne, Lacrosse, Malibu, Impala, Yukon (too much Tahoe evident in this rebadge), DTS, STS, SRX (opinion might change with the refresh due this summer) Cobalt, all CSVs, G6, GP, GTO, G5, SAAB 9-5, and Saturn ION.

It remains to be seen if the next CTS, GMT-900 trucks, next Malibu, Lambdas and the Aura will be done at least as well as the Tahoe/Escalade. If GM falters with this next round of vehicles then they will continue to lose more design talent and marekt share. The next 12 months of introductions will be critical to their future.

[Steel4ring]

GM needs to tout the JD power results in its ads on the G6 and Malibu.

[VibenPontiac]

Originally Posted by wpbharry

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...604100374/1014

There they go spouting off on the worth of the JDP Initial Quality Survey again - which means little to nothing. Long-term reports on the '04 Malibu by members of Edmunds with high mileage indicate little to no improvement over the previous generation. LOTS of problems as the odo climbs. Sub-quality parts, again.

I'll take a scientifically based (and a consistently validated study) over personal horror stories posted by edmunds' members (or any other site's for that matter) every single time. It has been noted time and time again that negative reviews by users of just about any product tend to outnumber positive reviews simply because people with a negative experience with a product or service are usually much more vocal and willing to tell their story than those with a positive experience.

[tom3]

That's actually true I think. I did a real quick survey on problems a while back, did a Google search on something like Toyota problems and Chevrolet problems, Toyota had about 40% more entries than Chevy. Real informal survey there but it does show there are concerns with any brand.

[member12]

Originally Posted by nadepalma

Source: [url]
GM scrimped on minivan development, basing the vehicles on an 8-year-old architecture. The result is a vehicle in which many parts are difficult to install, said Marty Cain, a 29-year veteran who does repair work at the Doraville, Ga., plant that builds the minivans.

"It's a tough vehicle to build," he said. "It's probably been a nightmare for some engineer."

While nearly every assembly-line worker in Fairfax got training to build the new Malibu, minivan assemblers received training only if the part they installed had changed from the old van, said Ernie Burel, a team leader with 29 years' experience at Doraville.

"Some parts fit poorly, and that threw us a curve," he said. "Now we're making our own manuals for how to do each job. It's evolved since the new minivans started" production.

"Every way, we're finding something new."

The vans' low ratings trouble workers at the plant, Cain said.

"It makes you feel bad," he said. "I come in every day wanting to build a good car. I want to leave feeling like I did."

Yet another reason to spend money on cars initially so you don't have to pay for a complete redesign two years down the road. Case in point: THe CSVs. They spent a lot of money improving the interior and crash test on that car- but now they have to spend all that and more on a new chassis and assembly line improvements. And where is quality control when all these parts don't fit well.

GM can perfume the pigs and sell them alongside much more worthy cars- or they can get it right at first. Start conquesting customers instead of losing them- and streamline the assembly process across the same platform.

And one of the reasons Delphi is going bankrupt (I know, Unions are the main) is that GM squeezes suppliers too much. Perhaps they will supply a quality product if they had some profit to work with.

[BurnOut]

I say that it's simple enough to avoid this issue... just don't buy a mini van!! Problem solved...

Seriously, though, what people need to understand is that GM has had a LOT of products to turn around, and it's just not possible to do them all at once. So, they have to start somewhere... which means that some products will be updated sooner, others will be updated later. It isn't ideal, but it IS realistic.

As an example, let's picture GM as a house. Now, this house, it has a few nice things about it, but it just hasn't been kept up. It needs foundation work, paint inside and out, a new roof, new carpet, and some plumbing work.

While it would be ideal to do it all at once so you can then have an "all new" house, it's just not practical. You might decide that the foundation work should take precedence, followed by the roof. The carpet is pretty bad, but it can be cleaned up and limped along until you can afford to replace it outright. The outside of the house needs to be painted in the name of protecting the structure of the house from the elements, but the interior paint can wait until other, higher priority issues get resolved. The plumbing, while it concerns you, can wait... a leaky faucet is irritating, but in the grand scheme of things, it's not the end of the world.

I think that we all recognize that GM is in the middle of a turnaround... the key word there is "middle"... it simply isn't possible to draw a line in the sand and say, "As of this date, EVERYTHING will be different."

[Buickman]

I think you'll see tremendous strides made in GM quality as a result of the new VP for quality, James Hresko. He replaces Kent Sears. Mr Hresko was Orion plant manager and turned a troubled plant around. He is a rising star, and for good reason.

Buickman
Founder
www.GeneralWatch.com

[member12]

Originally Posted by FamilyTruckster

Reviewers at Edmunds liked the 04 Malibu in the long term test. They only stated the problem was a noise from the brake ped and the power steering motor need replacement. BTW, the previous generation Malibu was a very reliable car as was the previous generation Impala.

They test those cars for 40,000 miles. If they had to replace a power steering and adjust the brake pedel...then that is a bad sign.

The Silverado and Traiblazer Car and Driver tested long term had to have the 4x4 serviced numerous times (very serious problems with the Silverado, electric switch on Trailblazer), the power steering on the Trailblazer, and other little things.

40,000 miles is right after the warranty goes out. If it sucks that bad before that, then it probably sucks even worse after when you have to start paying for those repairs. GM cars should not be built just to improve initial quaility (which measures quality control and factory defects rather than reliability), but to improve all the power equipement that screws up on current crop of cars and trucks.

[RWD60]

Originally Posted by BurnOut

I say that it's simple enough to avoid this issue... just don't buy a mini van!! Problem solved...

Seriously, though, what people need to understand is that GM has had a LOT of products to turn around, and it's just not possible to do them all at once. So, they have to start somewhere... which means that some products will be updated sooner, others will be updated later. It isn't ideal, but it IS realistic.

As an example, let's picture GM as a house. Now, this house, it has a few nice things about it, but it just hasn't been kept up. It needs foundation work, paint inside and out, a new roof, new carpet, and some plumbing work.

While it would be ideal to do it all at once so you can then have an "all new" house, it's just not practical. You might decide that the foundation work should take precedence, followed by the roof. The carpet is pretty bad, but it can be cleaned up and limped along until you can afford to replace it outright. The outside of the house needs to be painted in the name of protecting the structure of the house from the elements, but the interior paint can wait until other, higher priority issues get resolved. The plumbing, while it concerns you, can wait... a leaky faucet is irritating, but in the grand scheme of things, it's not the end of the world.

I think that we all recognize that GM is in the middle of a turnaround... the key word there is "middle"... it simply isn't possible to draw a line in the sand and say, "As of this date, EVERYTHING will be different."

not a bad analogy at all. only problem is that if this house isn't up to code and getting lots of good attention on the market ASAP, it's getting torn down and replaced with a foreign owned apartment complex. and while the apartments may be nice and even be worthy of a place in the neighborhood down the street, i think we can all agree that a nice old house that's been fixed up is even better. everyone knows this house was messed up... the foundation may be better, but people still see leaky faucets and dirty carpet when they first come in, so they don't even go to the basement to look at the foundation.

[GMFreak8]

****************, 2010 can't come fast enough, for me, and for GM. It seems like that year will be the golden year for GMs return. All the "new GM" models should be out by then... Anyone agree?