In an effort to spur sales, General Motors is offering no-interest, six-year loans on new vehicle purchases through June 30th. Unfortunately, only the slow-selling models (i.e., not very fuel efficient) are included in the sale. Oh, also they’re raising prices on 2009 models. [New York Times]


Edit Your Comment

  1. dragonfire1481 says:

    Right because raising prices is just the thing to help a business in a sputtering economy.

    I bet the money you’d save on the zero interest loan would get chewed up on gas REAL fast.

  2. ColoradoShark says:

    Tip: If you need a six year car loan, you can’t afford the car.

  3. kenblakely says:

    Yeah. Good luck unloading those gas-hogs there, GM…..

  4. differcult says:

    @ColoradoShark: Why would you take a shorter loan…you are getting free money. Play with the money you save.

    Good deal on the Impala and Saturn Cars

  5. drjayphd says:

    Anyone else amused that Chrysler’s ads for $2.99 gas also focus on the SUV’s, minivans and everything else you can’t afford to drive anymore? Yeah, good luck on that…

  6. tvboy says:

    They’re trying, anyway. I dug their Tahoe ad remix contest- after it went off the tracks, they didn’t pull the anti-gm content- ballsy.
    Right now they’re sending KG from Tenacious D to music fests to goof with musicians on camera. Unsure of the marketing, but its fun. Full disclosure: I’m contracting on the project.

  7. Askew says:

    Spellcheck fial!!!

  8. laserjobs says:

    GM raising prices like they said they would do in December. LOL!!!!

    They can’t raise prices if they can’t sell cars!!!

  9. ffmariners says:

    @ColoradoShark: With 0% interest… even if I could buy the car cash… I would take a 6 year loan on it.

  10. EBounding says:

    Although they’re raising prices, they’re also decreasing production. People who actually need an SUV or large truck will be willing to pay more for it. This leaves more capital and labor to build smaller cars for everyone else. They should have done this awhile ago.

  11. balthisar says:

    @ColoradoShark: If I had the chance to get a 30 year, interest free loan on a crappy Hyundai, I’d do it. Yeah, even if I had the cash outright. That’s just basic economic common sense.

  12. @ColoradoShark: No interest is no interest whether it’s over 1 year, 6 years or 60 years. Why would you assume that just because you are financing the car over 6 years that you can’t afford it? We regularly take out 30 year loans for mortgages that have pretty substantial interest rates (*cough-sub-prime- mortgage-crisis-cough*). What’s wrong with a 6 year no interest loan instead of a three year?

    Yes I know, the value of the car diminishes when you drive off the lot.

  13. firesign says:

    general *moters”? really?

  14. laserjobs says:

    @EBounding: They are not raising prices, it is a marketing ploy. They said they would raise prices last year to try and boost sales. There is more a chance of GM folding than seeing them raise prices.

  15. ColoradoShark says:

    @differcult: Every time I’ve seen low interest auto loans from the manufacturer you must choose between the loan or a cash rebate. So, the loan is not really zero percent.

    On the random car (Uplander) I checked you can get zero percent loan or $3000 cash back. As a typical model was less than $30,000, you are giving up a 10% rebate for zero percent loan. I’m not going to do the math to figure out the net effective interest rate, but it is *not* zero.

  16. opfreak says:

    oh please, gm does not have a problem with fuel efficent cars.

    Outside of a handfull of models, (prius,civic hybrid, civic), its not like the competition is that much better then GM in terms of fuel efficency.

    Its narrow minded stupid people that think that. Overall most cars in the same size range get nearly the same milage, no matter who makes them.

  17. opfreak says:


    ok outlander 30k,
    W/ Rebate 5% loan, 6 year loan

    so 27k @ 5% = 31307.99 (4307.99 cents in interest)

    NO Rebate, 0% interest, 6 year loan

    so 30k @ 0% interest = 30000.

    0% interest saved you $1307.00

    Other options.
    5% interest, 5 year loan
    = 3571.40 in interest. So 0% interest is still better then cash by $571.40

    5% interest, 4 year loan

    =2845.96 in interest. So Rebate, saves you 144.04 cents

    so the cut off depends on how long you will have the loan on the car for.

    >/=5 0% better
    <= 4 years, cash.


  18. humphrmi says:

    @ColoradoShark: OK so first it’s “If you need a six year car loan, you can’t afford the car” and then when disproven on that “tip” it’s “oh, it’s not really a zero percent loan”.

    Which argument are you going to stick with?

  19. firesign says:

    @balthisar: i’d take my hyundai over any gm product these days. 01 elantra gt. almost 107k, yet to do anything but routine maintenance and wear items. body and interior are still perfect, gets great gas mileage, etc etc. except for the ’67 chevy belair i had back in the day let’s just say my experience with gm products has been..less than optimal. ymmv of course.

  20. Trai_Dep says:

    @opfreak: Yeah, let’s assume that an Acura/Honda/Toyota are the same as a Focus or Taurus. Sure.
    Even so, if I buy a traditional-engined Toyota, say, I know that they’ll take my money and invest it developing Prius v2 or whatever. I do the same with GM and they’ll use it to develop cup-holder technology or into ad agencies devising ways to make it appear that if we stop buying Hummers, the Terrorists Have Won.

    I trust the others to spend their net revenues better than I trust the Big Three. Ensuring that the next time I’m in the market, there will be even more green alternatives for me to choose from.

  21. differcult says:

    @ColoradoShark: All depends on what you can do with that extra money. If you can earn more than you are giving up, why would you?

    Liquid cash is ALWAYS nice to have.

  22. opfreak says:


    kind of like that huge thundra that toyota spent money on?

    or wait, Honda, with its NSX its developing to be one of the fastest cars in the world with a v10 engine?

    or the honda that dropped the hybrid accord from its line up, and instead release a new bigger according with a v6 that doesn’t hit 30mpg?

    or acura thats working on a mroe rwd performace cars?

    The 3 companies you mentioned are only greener in your mass marketed brain dead mind.

  23. GearheadGeek says:

    It’s not particularly fair to say that all of the cars on the offer are “not very fuel efficient.” The big Impala actually gets slightly better fuel economy than the V6 Malibu which is not on the offer because it’s popular.

    The Impala isn’t an exciting car, but it’s big and has proven to be relatively reliable and CHEAP. If you need a large transportation unit that’s rated 28 mpg highway, it’s not a bad choice at the prices you can negotiate on top of 6-yr 0-interest financing.

  24. ColoradoShark says:

    @humphrmi: I’ll admit the first argument was a knee jerk reaction so I’d like to stick with the second argument. I particularly like @opfreak: excellent math skills. He/she did a nice analysis of the financial tradeoffs.

  25. GearheadGeek says:

    @opfreak: Okay, let me be clear, I think that Trai_Dep is showing some anti-GM bias. However, the “Accord Hybrid” was a STUPID vehicle on the same level as Lexus’ idiotic GS450h. It was tuned to give slightly-better-than-V6 economy for more-than-V6 performance, rather than being the more rational hybrid configuration of 4-cyl with electric for more torque/more economy that the Camry Hybrid is. And what do you know? Camry Hybrid sells (though less than the Prius, because it doesn’t offer as much look-at-my-greenness visual distinction.)

    I always thought the Accord Hybrid was poorly conceived. It should have been a 4 cylinder offering mileage in the 40s rather than a V6 offering slightly better mileage than the less-expensive all-gas V6.

  26. balthisar says:

    @firesign: And and the plural of anecdote isn’t data. Lots of GM owners can say the same. In any case, I wasn’t picking on Hyundai because they suck, just using it as an example of cars that very few people really want to buy, but don’t feel they can do better. No, I’m just picking on you now. The point was (really, this time), they’re cheap. I have cash to buy a car, you know, because it’s a cheap car, but despite having the cash in hand, I’d still prefer to finance the thing for 20 years at 0% than to pay cash. If I’d used something like a fully loaded Lincoln Navigator as the example, it wouldn’t have the same impact. I’d sound like a rich snob — “I’ve got the cash for a Navigator”. And so on. Who doesn’t have the cash for a Hyundai? (excluding people below the US poverty threshold [notice how I didn’t say “poor people”?]).

  27. GearheadGeek says:

    @balthisar: Where have YOU been? LOTS of Americans don’t have cash for a Hyundai, even the $10k accent. Americans as a group don’t save, and you have to save to have cash. The credit lust we’ve experienced over the last 20 years has been bad for our economy… people not only don’t save, but they buy on credit on top of it.

    This doesn’t negate your point, even with cash in hand to pay off the car, I’d do the math between cash-back and interest-free before I bought a car I was going to buy anyway (assuming I had both of those options for the car I wanted… I never seem to want the cars they have the big promos on.) I’m not in a hurry to pay off my car, because even at the pitiful rates now available for “high” interest savings I’m making more money with my cash in the bank than I’m spending on interest at 1.9% on the car note.

  28. battra92 says:

    @balthisar: I love my 07 Elanta. It’s also a CR best buy for gas sipping sedan (I’m routinely pulling 33-34 since they fixed the roads here)

    Seriously dude, STFU.

    @ColoradoShark: Nothing wrong with a 6 year loan. You can always pay it off earlier and have that lower payment safety net JUST in case. I’m paying 3 year payment plan on my 6 year loan and the difference was minimal after crunching numbers.

  29. snoop-blog says:

    Personally, I hate the new cars. reasons why:

    They have tracking devices built in.

    They are OVER computerized (oil lights check engine lights that trip just because you drove x amount of miles.)

    The parts are too expensive

    Too difficult to do your own work on them

    Built too cheap (cv joints/axles, plastics for dash’s, etc)


    Too quiet- Can’t tell you how many times I didn’t even hear one coming down the street.

    I could go on. These are just my opinions, I don’t expect too many people to feel the same way.

  30. Trai_Dep says:

    @opfreak: I’ll bet you $2,000 that their fleet MPG standards are smaller than the Big Three’s. Right here, right now. Without even bothering to look it up.
    Do you people bother to think before you start typing?!

  31. Trai_Dep says:

    @snoop-blog: And, new cars are a sucker’s game. Depreciation after you roll of the lot s-l-a-y-s.

  32. Trai_Dep says:

    @opfreak: Oops, I take back my last comment, didn’t mean to fly off the handle. My bad. I thought you were one of those guys blindly defending the Big Three vs the imports. Sorry!


    While the Japanese companies make some unfortunate choices in their current product line, I think that the direction that they’re heading is more positive than the Big Three. I’m hopefully optimistic that the Japanese companies, once their behemoths are crushed by changes in the consumer auto market, will further their leadership in this direction.
    I can’t see the Big Three making the same shift, or making it as effectively.
    Thus, I’d be happier supporting imports over the latter’s vehicles.

    How’s that? :D

  33. Trai_Dep says:

    @opfreak: PS: Get an avatar for your name, bro. It’s hard recognizing people’s writing when they have just a blank! :)

  34. stands2reason says:

    Whew! I’m glad I don’t have any money invested in GM!

  35. Silversmok3 says:

    “G. M. also said it would raise prices on 2009 models by an average of 3.5 percent to compensate for lower sales volumes and higher material costs”

    Lets remember that building cars costs money. And with gas being $4.50 a gallon now, its gonna be a lot more expensive to ship assembly parts and cars in 2009 then it is today. 3.5 % is just enough to pay the freight truck back for transporting the car to GM’s sales lot in the first place.

    As far as their cars are concerned, GM like Ford,Chrysler and GASP!, even Honda (Ridgeline truck) is having trouble selling utility vehicles in this market.

    As far as the press is concerned, GM can’t do anything right.What else is new.

  36. Trai_Dep says:

    Err, as far as reality is concerned, GM can’t do anything right.

  37. LUV2CattleCall says:


    If you actually get approved for this PR scheme, you CAN afford a car!

  38. LUV2CattleCall says:

    @firesign: @battra92:

    You know…a year ago, I would have made a snide comment about Hyundai being a POS..but I just rented an Azura or whatever they’re called. When I saw the H logo on the keys, I thought “oh shit” but I got in and was blown away!I have a BMW and, while the handling/performance isn’t at the same level, the fit and finish blow the bimmer away! Nice, solid, great looking interiors. If only they had some other name on the trunk so the stereotype didn’t follow…

  39. balthisar says:

    It’s telling that everyone has a sense of humor except for the Hyundai owners :-)

  40. battra92 says:

    @LUV2CattleCall: I was a doubter as well. I test drove one on a whim and found a car that was solid and had a lot more going for it than the Corolla that I had pretty much decided on. Plus the insurance is like a grand less since Corollas are the top stolen cars.