I've got to politely disagree with you on a majority of your points:
1. jdpa is an
independent statistics gathering firm. They don't use a ridiculously small and biased readership upon which to base their results (ahem, Consumer Reports). They are arguably the industry leader for benchmark information in a number of areas; including the automotive sector. Here's some info for you (links are provided at end of this post).
Vehicle Dependability Study; "Entry Mid-size" category: 2005: 1st place, 2004: 2004: 1st place, 2003: 2003: 1ST place
Initial Quality Study: 2005, 1st place, 2004: 3rd place (behind Hyundai Sonata & Oldsmobile Alero), 2003: 1st place
As for them not being comparable vehicles, I again disagree:
Malibu: Length: 188.30, Width: 69.90, Height: 57.50, Weight: 3174 lbs
Camry: Length: 189.2, Width: 71.7, Height: 57.5, Weight: 3285 lbs
(again, links provided at end of this post)
2. Yes, GM makes and sells more trucks and SUV's than Toyota. But how can you hold that against GM? They've been in the industry longer and have a reputation for making hard-working, reliable light-duty based vehicles. Toyota simply doesn't have that. SUV's became today's station wagon and GM/Ford were better-positioned to reap the sales. GM can't sell them unless the public wants them. Toyota isn't doing anybody a favor here either: look at their small-SUV; the RAV4. It's now got a 268hp engine. Isn't that a bit ridiculous for a SMALL-SUV? Face it: all manufacturers push horsepower and size. Because people buy into the horsepower=fun and size=comfort mentality.
3. The "it's not more than you need, just more than you're used to." slogan you are referring to is GM's tag line for it's GMC brand. It's pushing "Professional-Grade" trucks. The supposed intent is to push how rugged their trucks are. While Toyota's advertisement isn't quite so verbal with it's message, it isn't exactly dissimilar when you see a Tundra commercial with a Tundra driving away after being struck by a meteor.
4. Yes, GM/Chevrolet has the Aveo. The entire reason for GM's acquisition of Daewoo was to gain access to the cheap labor market of Korea. It was a bonus gaining the manufacturing plants as well. Let's face it: American companies can't compete using American labor. NAFTA has bent us all over. For GM to make a $16k car in America and make money on it? While providing health care benefits? And pension plans? Not a chance. But with Korean labor? Yes-- they can. The Aveo still doesn't get good enough gas mileage for me. It's still strapped to it's original Daewoo engine -- which isn't bad, but it isn't exactly a fuel-economy leader. I'd much prefer that GM swapped it with their award-winning Ecotec line from their Opel subsidiary.
5. Not yet - but if you wait half-a-year, this answer will change. This is a very interesting point -- and I'm glad you brought it up. GM's stated stance on this is to put hybrids into vehicles that will make the most difference first. Which is why they've pushed hybrids into their commercial busses and their full-size trucks/suv's. The Saturn Vue has a hybrid offering right now, and the Chev Malibu and the new Saturn Aura (this fall) will be hybrid as well. So I guess you'll just hafta find fault for a company that targets the benefits towards their "worst offenders" first.
6. I agree with you completely on this point. GM's got a whole line of 4cyl's and diesels in use in Europe that should've been ported to the US. I know that GM's got plans for a 4cyl and 6cyl diesel in the US in the near-future.. so I'm hoping that we get some of those 4cyl's as well. One thing to note: GM's 4cyl, named "EcoTec" comes in many different variants. The US only has the 2.0 (supercharged), the 2.2l, and the 2.4l varaints. Europe has waaay more.. scaling all the way down to a 1.4l. They are outrageously durable motors. As it is, the 2.2l in the Cobalt/Malibu is rated too conservatively. While it's rated at 34mpg in the Malibu, I've got a co-worker that routinely gets 36mpg with hers. If you browse the edmunds townhall forums, on the Malibu, you'll find many claims like this.
7. The Magnum is classified as a truck because the platform it's built upon is the one used for their mid-sized Dakota pickup. The "HHT" is actually called "HHR" (high-heritage-roof; an design term that ended up sticking around enough to actually make it as the final vehicle name) is built upon GM's Delta-platform; the same platform as the Cobalt and the Saturn ION. I'm sure the station wagons went away with consumers moving into SUV's. If the sales aren't there to allow for a profit, the manufacturer doesn't have much choice but to adapt/move to something else.
*** LINKS ***
Vehicle Dependability Study; "Entry Midsize" cateogry
2005:
http://www.jdpower.com/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=20050892004:
http://www.jdpa.com/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=20040552003:
http://www.jdpa.com/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2003050Initial Quality Study
2005:
http://www.jdpower.com/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=20050692004:
http://www.jdpa.com/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=20040372003:
http://www.jdpower.com/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2003028Malibu Stats:
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/spec_Exterior.aspx?year=2006&make=Chevrolet&model=Malibu&trimid=-1Camry Stats:
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/spec_Exterior.aspx?year=2007&make=Toyota&model=Camry&trimid=-1