GM "Proud" Commercial

[Gizmo2]

With the government involve now they will probably just remove both lights altogether.:thumbsup:................:confused2:

 

[N80]

No, that would be too cost effective. The truth is they will both still be there but neither will work.

 

[mustangsallysdad]

I thought daytime running lights were a Canadian thing? Not sure they are even required here? In my state they would be required to function or you get a "REJECT" decal at annual inspection and a 5 day corrective order, even if they are not Federally mandated...if they are a legal illuminating device they are required to function. Obviously, at the very least, they are a high maintenance item...if not required, do away with them and use that money for something else. Paying back taxpayers, legitimately for instance. Instead of the shell game method they're trying to make us believe.

 

[bp fick]

If one ran the head lights, or burned a bulb in their garage all the time, they too would fail. Since the daytime running lights get so many hours, the bulbs can/will last only so long. Not a priority of the owners to replace, I assume.

Day time lights are a source of controversies. They help visibility on two lane roads, but also get inadvertently used, without proper taillights, at night. That which is meant for safety creates other issues. Must be some Peter Principle.

 

[mustangsallysdad]

If one ran the head lights, or burned a bulb in their garage all the time, they too would fail. Since the daytime running lights get so many hours, the bulbs can/will last only so long. Not a priority of the owners to replace, I assume.

Day time lights are a source of controversies. They help visibility on two lane roads, but also get inadvertently used, without proper taillights, at night. That which is meant for safety creates other issues. Must be some Peter Principle.

This has gone on for many years...shouldn't GM have addressed this anyway by now? They have to be aware of the higher consumption rate...why not engineer them to last longer or eliminate them altogether?

 

[two_bit_score]

One thing that concerns me is that if we stop buying GM's due to the fraudulent claims by Whitacre, amoung many other reasons not to buy, then GM may require more TaxPayer cash infusions to continue. Obama considers them too big to fail and surely would not allow them to go under and take the union jobs down with them.

We're stuck with GM one way or the other.

 

[955er]

Its also a national security issue. As a country, we cannot afford to mothball some of our most modern, up-to-date manufacturing facilities. GM's Willow Run in Michigan is an example. If things hit the fan, we may need these factories to make, say, tanks and bombs. And fast.

There were several years during WWII where the big three did not make a single car for domestic public consumption.

 

[bp fick]

This has gone on for many years...shouldn't GM have addressed this anyway by now? They have to be aware of the higher consumption rate...why not engineer them to last longer or eliminate them altogether?

Gonna "blame" GE or Phillips for producing bulbs that only last 2000 or 4000 hours? Shrug. Don't see it the same way you do, apparently. These same operators never check their brake light bulbs either, to my aggravation. Don't see this one as being pinned on GM.

I don't buy GM, never much have. Did own a couple Safari/Astro vans back in the day, as they were tough, economical and hauled alot of people and were a fair tow vehicle. Other than that, can't think of any others, out of a hundred new and used vehicles purchased over 40 years. Never was much of a fan.

 

[Chuck52]

Is the light problem just with the trucks? The lights on my 2003 Impala work fine...the right side has never been changed, but a deer changed the left side, along with the fender, a year ago. I can't really say I've ever checked the lights during the day, but they are the same bulbs used at night and they work then. In fact, if I get another car that doesn't do the automatic on thing, I'll probably be driving around without lights pretty often! I know when I drive my F150 I have to remember to turn on the lights when it is raining, etc. It's also nice when I drive into a parking garage during the day that the light are on in the Impala; I notice that in the truck as I often have to turn the lights on to see.

Chuck

 

[mustangsallysdad]

Is the light problem just with the trucks? The lights on my 2003 Impala work fine...the right side has never been changed, but a deer changed the left side, along with the fender, a year ago. I can't really say I've ever checked the lights during the day, but they are the same bulbs used at night and they work then. In fact, if I get another car that doesn't do the automatic on thing, I'll probably be driving around without lights pretty often! I know when I drive my F150 I have to remember to turn on the lights when it is raining, etc. It's also nice when I drive into a parking garage during the day that the light are on in the Impala; I notice that in the truck as I often have to turn the lights on to see.

Chuck

Only seen it on GM trucks and truck based SUV's.