: Gas Guzzler Tax Changed



Cadillac Tony
11-19-08, 07:58 PM
Well, my first CTS-Vs have been built and assigned VINs, so naturally I had to go poking around and check out the Invoice and Window Stickers on-line. During these travels, I was shocked to see that the Gas Guzzler tax listed on the Window Sticker is $2,600, not the $1,300 that we were told in our training and listed on GMPricing.

I dug a little further, and it appears that the GMPricing site has been updated to reflect a $1,600 tax for the Manual, and now shows a $2,600 tax for the Auto.

I apologize to everyone here for posting up that the $1,300 was for the auto, but until either yesterday or today, that's what our Pricing Schedule was showing. It appears that they were a little quick to release the $1,300 figure to us, as it has now been changed. Here's a link to one of my incoming units so you can see for yourself: CLICK (http://www.gmbuypower.com/ws/nvlWindowSticker.vs?make=ca&makeDescrip=Cadillac&style=3.6l%20v6%20rwd&makeId=006&vehicleModel=/images/gmbp/12006/vehicle/2009/med/200954.gif&year=2009&sellingSource=12&subModel=&subModelId=54&BAC=132763&modelId=025&pvc=5162&mmc=6DM69&modelDesignator=6DM69&brand=CTS&model=CTS&type=1SA&typeDescrip=1SA&styleDescrip=3.6l%20v6%20rwd&styleId=3.6l%20v6%20rwd&partnerID=900001&userType=GMBP&searchType=4&VIN=1G6DN57P590150527&iPi=5&fPi=5&dPath=FRDP&linksInCCT=true&zip=34788&dealerName=PLAZA%20CADILLAC&dealerURL=http://www.plazacadillac.com/en_US/HomePage&distance=0.0&dealerStreet=8893%20US%20HWY%20441&dealerCity=LEESBURG&dealerRegionCode=FL&dealerPostalcode=34788-4023&dealerBpManagerName=Tony%20Pagano&dealerBpPhone=(352)%20787-1323&nameplateids=006^)

Just wanted to let everyone know to avoid any "sticker shock".

CIWS
11-19-08, 08:33 PM
Ahh that makes more sense :) Wasn't the STS-V 2,200 GGT on the sticker ?

MSOsr
11-19-08, 11:04 PM
Oddly, the Cars.com website showed that the $1300 gas guzzler tax went away if you switched from the manual to the automatic. Tony, you are showing the gas guzzler tax is higher on the auto?

Mike

caddiedrummer
11-20-08, 09:02 AM
No problem, Tony, you were giving the latest and best info you had, as usual. When I heard $1300, I was skeptical. Owning several cars over 500HP, I was wondering how Caddy pulled that rabbit out of the hat.

Not to go on yet another rant but this once again shows the audacity of our imperial Congess. Here they are this week getting their usual face time berating GM and Ford Execs (while Rome burns) never once owning up to all they have done to drive jobs overseas, their ridiculous zeal in helping unions (for votes) and dumb stuff like the gas guzz tax. Heck, I can remember when the interest you paid on car loans was deductiable--they took that away. (unless on your equity line and I suspect after January that will be gone.)

Things are so bad the largest Vette dealer in the US is taking a page from the gun dealers, saying on their websites basically "get your V8s while you can because we firmly believe Congress will get rid of them" (as part of helping the car companies)

Welcome to France. Enjoy your Smart Car.

Cadillac Tony
11-20-08, 09:04 AM
Oddly, the Cars.com website showed that the $1300 gas guzzler tax went away if you switched from the manual to the automatic. Tony, you are showing the gas guzzler tax is higher on the auto?

Mike

Correct. The link I posted above is to an actual window sticker of a CTS-V I have incoming, which shows the higher Guzzler Tax for the auto. As CIWS said, it makes since considering that the auto gets slightly lower fuel economy than the stick. I was just surprised they made such a large mistake in the sales training materials and web site.

CIWS
11-20-08, 10:19 AM
Welcome to France. Enjoy your Smart Car.

No doubt there is no substitute for the sound of big V8 / V10 American motor, but we could build an electric car that could quietly stomp it's ass. We need to quit doinking around and design for the future of 10-15 years from now.

thebigjimsho
11-20-08, 10:26 AM
Smart cars, in the US, are dumb...

MSOsr
11-20-08, 10:53 AM
My neighbor has one and I swear you could push it over on its side with your hands (at least it looks like you could).

Mike

asabase
11-20-08, 11:07 AM
They aren't even that much more efficient than a more realistically sized car like a Mini.

JEM
11-20-08, 02:11 PM
Personally, I see a use for everything. Once upon a time I was on the list for a re-lease of an EV1, back when GM was trying to get them all off the road - not because I'm an eco-nut (in fact, far from it.) But it was an interesting piece of hardware capable of serving a need, and it was fun. The Aptera is an interesting project, built more like a Lancair than a Lincoln, we'll see how it pans out.

I'm not fond of the Prius largely because it's just not a very pleasant (and certainly not exactly fun) car to drive. The powertrain works fine, it's the rest of the car that's bothersome, and that's true of most recent Toyotas.

AC Propulsion has been hanging around the high-end end of the EV market for a long time, selling small numbers of their AC150 motor and related bits at very high prices, doing $50K (plus car) conversions of Scion xBs and prototypes for automakers; now they've got a deal with BMW to provide parts for 500 electric Minis. The Scion's probably more useful, but the Mini's got manufacturer backing; they're going to be expensive but a lot more useful than, say, a Tesla roadster. Tesla's largely frittered away their first-mover advantage (when you take Elon Musk's money, you get Elon Musk's certainty he knows everyone's job better than the experienced people doing them...) and they'll dry up and blow away eventually.

Funny, I was predicting a year and a half ago that gas was going to be back under $2.50/gallon within eighteen months, and I was right. I just didn't predict the collapse of everything else that went along with it. I don't think we're going to see oil back over $100/bbl anytime soon, though $70-80 might be sustainable. I see $80/bbl as being the point at which alternatives (including gasoline/alcohol/diesel-compatible liquid hydrocarbons made from non-petroleum sources) are economically viable if the government just stays out of the way.

The problem is that now we have a whole lot of folks determined to repeat the Carter administration.

Frankly, I'd love to just clean out the driveway then find some GM dealership owner who's got all the lines somewhere and hand him a check for $200-or-so-K and say "I want a Cobalt SS sedan in a boring light color with the limited-slip, a diesel GMC 2500HD short-bed four-door in any light color, a blue Z06, a CTS-V with the slushbox, oh, and give me a manual G6 GXP too."

With a somewhat-deflated portfolio and too many other uses (like three project cars...) for money right now, that's not going to happen, but nearly as I see - as someone whose only new domestic-car purchase in a twenty-seven-year car-buying career was in March of 1991 - GM's products are that good these days, and I've got reasonably high expectations for the Volt too.

thebigjimsho
11-20-08, 03:22 PM
They aren't even that much more efficient than a more realistically sized car like a Mini.
They aren't at all. Smarts don't run on regular and don't get great gas mileage. They're incredibly small but you can't fit 2 in 1 parking space. Maybe in certain cities they may have specified parking for Smarts but not anywhere around here. And like lane splitting, there is no real advantage of being so small on American roads.

In older European cities with very narrow streets and without the need of interstate travel, I can see where a Smart car works. But not in the US.

And when I see them on the wide open plains of the central US, cruising down the Interstates, I cringe. There is someone who has the disposable income to try to impress a group of people who bend every stat to decry automobiles...

Razorecko
11-20-08, 03:32 PM
^ smart cars are a joke, my '93 turbo mr2 gets just as good gas mileage, can run laps around the smart car, AND has more trunk space....oh and t-tops for summer =)

Surfer-Dude
11-21-08, 01:09 PM
Are my eyes bad or did I just see the 09' CTS-V is listed as 10/16 for mileage? Wtf? Thats worse then a lot of exotics. Is it really that bad or was that a misprint? Cost of filling up doesn't bother me, but its the constant filling up that would, friend got rid of his e60 M5 as filling every two days finally drove him nutz, wasn't even fun on a trip constantly having to get gas.

Razorecko
11-21-08, 01:20 PM
10/16 ?? woah, i get like 10/14 on my jeep srt8...

asabase
11-21-08, 01:49 PM
ZR-1 gets 14/20 so I imagine it should be pretty close to that.

JEM
11-21-08, 02:10 PM
Maybe a bit lower than the ZR1, after all, it weighs a thousand pounds more.

gotapex
11-21-08, 05:21 PM
Smart cars, in the US, are dumb...

Smart cars in the US are great, at least they were last year before the dealers opened. You got more attention pulling up to the club in one than a Ferrari 360. Pretty amazing. :) Guess they're not so useful anymore.

jvp
11-22-08, 01:29 AM
Tony -


I dug a little further, and it appears that the GMPricing site has been updated to reflect a $1,600 tax for the Manual, and now shows a $2,600 tax for the Auto.

You certainly have access to more information than I do; please don't take this the wrong way. The numbers don't seem to add up right, though. There are sites online that let you calculate engine RPM for a given set of inputs: wheel diameter, gear ratio, final drive, and road speed.

If we assume a fixed road speed (65MPH) and a fixed rear tire size (about 26.85inches), we have two variables left: rear end ratio and final drive. For the manual, those two numbers are 3.73 and .63 respectively. For the auto, it's 3.23 and .67 respectively.

Given the road speed (65MPH) we'd get 1911RPMs for the manual and 1760RPMs for the automatic. A difference of about 150RPMs at 65MPH. The only difference between the two cars at that point is overall mass (the auto expected to be a tad bit heavier than the stick). However, at steady highway speeds, mass doesn't really come into play.

So, in the end, the stick SHOULD have worse gas mileage on the highway than the auto because it's running at a higher engine RPM. My guess is the city mileage is slightly in favor of the manual given the mass and the gearing (city driving is where mass comes into play).

Do you have the official EPA numbers from GM yet? All I see are the estimates on Edmunds, which I don't believe.

jas

Razorecko
11-22-08, 12:15 PM
^ the stick SHOULD get worse gas mileage but its stated as slightly higher in the documentation given to the dealers. We have to remember that obviously the manual has less parasitic loss the the automatic. Especially since the automatic isn't even a true dual clutch system.

Surfer-Dude
11-24-08, 09:16 PM
Do you have the official EPA numbers from GM yet? All I see are the estimates on Edmunds, which I don't believe.

jasMags are showing the rating at 10/16 :holycrap: , thats even way worse than my much heavier suv. 16 highway....jeeze

MacOSR
11-24-08, 11:25 PM
10/16 sounds about right to me. I get about 12 with city driving in my M5. You don't buy these cars for their great gas mileage ;-)