General => Lounge => Topic started by: jcassity on June 15, 2005, 09:33:56 PM
Title: General Motors
Post by: jcassity on June 15, 2005, 09:33:56 PM
whats up with them,,? i was on the way to my parents in ky and the news broadcast said GM was laying off tons of people and outsourcing the work. Dad said thier stock bottomed out recently as well.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: ipsd on June 15, 2005, 10:45:25 PM
GM sucks that is all there is to it.Well most of them any way. That way there aren't any employees to get a discount so we get the same disocount as them NONE.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: 20th anny 5.o on June 15, 2005, 11:01:30 PM
From what one of my friends said they are laying off and shutting down a whole factory that just makes Chevy Tahoe transmissions, that and thier stock is bottoming out.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: CougarSE on June 16, 2005, 01:28:30 AM
Sales J.
And this was from two weeks ago.
Quote
DETROIT - Auto workers in Oshawa will be laid off temporarily next week, as General Motors eases production in response to slowing sales being experienced by all major domestic automakers.
GM announced on Thursday it will lay off 2,500 workers as it idles the Oshawa plant that produces the Buick Century, Buick Regal and Chevrolet Lumina.
Another 1,000 will be laid off at the plant in Baltimore where the Chevrolet Astro and GMC Safari minivans are made.
CAW workers in Oshawa will receive 65 per cent of their pay during the layoff. Their U.S. counterparts will get 95 per cent.
U.S. sales of GM products are down nine per cent for the first four months this year, which includes a 16-per-cent drop in April.
Sales for all major domestic automakers have been sliding for seven months.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: CougarSE on June 16, 2005, 01:38:19 AM
I think that killing the f body was a mistake. I mean there are just as many of those on the road as mustangs. And dare I say it they are (were) better cars. Yes they cost more but no stock mustang beats a stock f body. Its all good when you use a detuned Vette' engine. Only problem I hear from them is something that plauges all GM vehicles. Poor interior panel quality, Look inside one of them and something will be broken. Also the door pin issue.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: thesoldan on June 16, 2005, 09:15:51 AM
I would have to agree with the f body comment, that was a big mistake. But their real problem is their health care and employee benefits. They said that for every GM car you buy, $1500 goes for their employee health plans. Last year GM spend $5.2 BILLION on employee health care! :eek: So they are going overseas where they pay people less.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Thunder Chicken on June 16, 2005, 09:24:03 AM
GM has been having some serious financial problems, but they have little or nothing to do with the F-body, which never sold enough to make a difference on the bottom line. GM's biggest problems (and they are indeed big problems - some say they could actually bring GM down) are:
1) The Fiat fiasco. A while ago GM bought a portion of Fiat, and in an example of incredible stupidity, GM agreed to either buy more Fiat or pay Fiat two billion dollars to get out of the deal. GM recently paid Fiat the two billion dollars. $2,000,000,000 checks have a big effect on the bottom line. This will probably go down in history as one of the stupidest automotive deals ever to happen. GM was duped.
2) Pensions/Medicare obligations. All those years of promising the world to its unionized employees are now catching up to GM as those employees reach retirement age. GM does not have the money to meet those obligations - this is the single biggest cloud over GM's future. Quite simply, GM wrote checks it couldn't cash when it made those promises. To be fair to GM, the unions held a gun to GM's head in order to get those promises...
3) Dwindling truck/SUV sales. With Ford and Dodge building better trucks, and now Toyota and Nissan joining the party, GM's remarkably boring truck line has been hammered in the marketplace of late. Its aging SUV fleet has been flailing as well. It's the sagging truck/SUV sales that are responsible for much of the layoffs you're hearing about.
4) A spectacularly bad model lineup. GM has too long said "It's good enough" when developing cars. The G6/Malibu is a perfect example. Compared to other cars in the marketplace, the G6 is inferior in just about every respect. This inferiority is driving people to superior cars such as the Altima, Camry, Accord and even the Sonata in droves. GM needs to pull their heads out of their asses and build cars that will sell well on their merits, not cars that sell well because they've been deeply discounted. They finally got it right with the Cobalt; now they need to get it right with the "bread and butter" cars.
These problems are bad enough when taken individually, but when combined they really could bring down the giant that is GM.
And don't think Ford is immune - unless Ford does something soon it will be in the same boat. Mustangs alone are not gonna keep FoMoCo afloat, and the Five Hundred was not "good enough" when compared to the competition. If it wasn't for the F150 Ford would've been history long ago.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: EricCoolCats on June 16, 2005, 10:20:46 AM
And one more reason...
5) Too many cars and too many divisions. GM's cars actually cannibalize sales from ITSELF. You don't see that happening at any other car company. Everyone else's divisions have at least a general purpose and game plan to make sure they're not stealing sales from themselves. GM is more than happy to market 2, 3, even 4 nearly-identical cars in the same segment. Well, if one isn't good enough, how could four be?
I think this restructuring will eventually turn out to be a good thing. It's something they knew they'd have to eventually do, just didn't want to until there was no other choice. I really feel bad for all the people whose jobs will be displaced because GM never had the foresight in the first place. And that is why I will never own a GM car. They are truly the Dark Side.
And please, for the love of God, let the powers that be at GM kill off Buick already. Wouldn't mind Saturn and their dipshiznit cars going either (all respects to Carm, of course). ;)
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: 20th anny 5.o on June 16, 2005, 10:27:46 AM
I believe that buick pontiac and saturn are all on the chopping block, if im correct i feel that they will cut saturn first then buick and lastly pontiac.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: jcassity on June 16, 2005, 10:30:30 AM
of all the wars we have experienced in the past,, including the cold war,, i call this the Silent War. Much of the USA marketplace and property is owned by the middle east and the orient. It was estimated at last count broadcasted by CNN that China owns about 41% of our Core and Entertainment resource in the US.
The is good news,,Companies are finally starting to realize the financial impact outsourcing has that was previously thought to be a low risk known. The risks were not computated completely and now they employ more lawyers than ever, at an outsourced rate but 200 times more previous to 1990, to combat patentfraud and counterfits, not to mention the costs building up regions which 10-15 years ago were rice fields or poverty struck.
Lou Dobbs had the head of the AFLCIO on a few weeks ago and he said: "the Lure of outsourcing is so great and its effects are similar to gambling, they constantly think next quarter things will get better"
Our short and long term fix to this would be to reduce outsourcing to about 15-25% gross, increase our trade with cananda and mexico to about 75%while we admit fault that we have let other countries walk on us and break every rule in the book to get products imported while other countries allow our tankers to sit off their ss rejecting our product except for scap metal and paper.
anyone who really gives a should become a member of the below site. If you ever wondered how to contact anyone in congress ect ect , or have your say directly to your senator,, then have a look. I recently circulated the Social Security Petition in my community and got 600 names just in my town in a two week span. People do want things better but sometimes they just dont know how to go about it and this site really takes you there. http://www.workingamerica.org/home.cfm
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Tbird232ci on June 16, 2005, 10:40:56 AM
Pontiac is pulling out cars, and while i personally think theyre sharp looking, i know they wont sell, they have a rather bland appearance, and performance will be rather tame, as most pontiacs are now
another problem, GM has no real "flagship" cars, Chevy has the Corvette, Pontiac has the Solstice (which will probably die out, very goofy looking), what about Buick? Saturn has the Ion Redline, but none of their top cars are advertised much, no one truly knows anything about them, because they try to target only a certain price range, and not many are running around
i remember being younger, and id see a top of the line sports car, and i knew id never own one, but id always want to own something along the same line of it, people who could buy a corvette could buy an f-body for example
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: pro-five-oh on June 16, 2005, 12:39:19 PM
Have we mentioned market share yet? GM has slid in market share consistently since the 1970s. They have excuses, they always do. But this time they're either gonna get their shiznit straight or go belly up.
Would be nice if the government would do something about the healthcare crisis to help. Last I heard Dubya told the US Automakers they are on their own. Considering all the tricks the puppiesanese do with currency manipulation for Toyota/Honda/etc, you'd figure lowering healthcare costs would be just common sense.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Thunder Chicken on June 16, 2005, 12:47:46 PM
Quote from: EricCoolCats
And one more reason...
5) Too many cars and too many divisions. GM's cars actually cannibalize sales from ITSELF...*snip* ...let the powers that be at GM kill off Buick already. Wouldn't mind Saturn and their dipshiznit cars going either (all respects to Carm, of course). ;)
Truer words were never spoken. GM has got too many divisions. In the past they could get away with it for a few reasons - one, there was not nearly as much competition; two, the cars were actually different from each other; and three, there was such a thing as "brand loyalty". You started with a Chev, traded up to a Pontiac or Olds (depending on your taste), traded up again to a Buick, and retired in a Caddillac. Nowadays people start with a Chev and decide they'll never own a GM again.
GM should pare down to two or three divisions: Chevy could sell bread-and-butter cars, trucks and SUV's, like Toyota Caddy could sell the luxury stuff, like Lexus And, if GM could actually pull it off, Pontiac could sell youth-oriented stuff, like Scion
GMC, Buick, and Saturn should all disappear. Saturn was an interesting experiment, but GM "GM-ified" the entire lineup and tossed all lessons learned by Saturn anyway, so it's now redundant. Saturn cars were once unique and shared nothing with other GM cars except their Delco-supplied electronics. They had their own engines, trannies and chassis. Now Saturn is nothing more than a rebadged Chev/Pontiac/Buick (and really, just a replacement for Olds).
This is only part of the problem, though. The big problem is that GM simply does not build good, desirable cars. They simply cannot stop doing things the "old way". After 40 years of playing catch-up with the imports, GM is still playing catch-up. Had they done it right they would have not only caught up, but passed, the imports long ago. The first thing GM has to do is toss nearly all of its powertrains and come up with something modern. Pushrod engines, no matter how impressive they may be, are obsolete. People don't want to hear about LS-this and cubic-inch that. They want ovehead cams, variable valve timing, multi valves, etc. No matter how "modern" you try to make an ancient engine design look, it's still an ancient engine design. People dropping vast sums of money on new cars do not want old, coarse, obsolete designs, they want cutting edge. The imports provide this, and the imports are gaining market share for it.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: V8Demon on June 16, 2005, 01:14:43 PM
Quote
I think that killing the f body was a mistake. I mean there are just as many of those on the road as mustangs
While I agree that killing the F-body was a mistake I have to point out that even when it was around the Mustang out sold it heavily Forr the 2002 Model year Mustangs: 142,404 Camaros: 42,098 Firebirds: I can't seem to find an exact #, but many sources say under 20,000
Fact is the toal combined sales of Camaros AND Firebirds combined was under 100,000 combined from 1996 on to the final run in 2002 even in the 96-98 model years when the F-body was absolutely handing the Mustang it's A$$ on the track and street performance-wise.
GM had a winner in it's stables and I always seem to remember commercials for their more bland cars, almost NEVER an F-body commercial on TV during the last body style (I can only remember 2). GM has not paid attention to something it should have.....The competition whether it be Ford, Chrysler, Honda or Toyota.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: pro-five-oh on June 16, 2005, 01:47:53 PM
F-body is a red herring, it means absolutely nothing in the car biz. When the F-body got the LS1 in 1998, the V6 Mustang outsold both the Camaro and Firebird COMBINED.
Now if the F-body was a better more modern design (taller, bigger back seat, bigger butt, etc) it could be reaping the success of the new Mustang. But that would require GM to actually invest in its product. And that's a big no-no in GM-land.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Beau on June 16, 2005, 02:04:10 PM
I know it's really nothing to prove a point, but I've drove 3 GM vehicles in the past 5 years, none for very long. They were: 1994 Chevy Caprice, 1988 Chevy truck, 4x4, w/305 and auto, 1986 Chevy S-series Blazer. The Caprice was the best of the lot, but just like all the other GM stuff, bland and boring. As for the truck and SUV, too heavy, underpowered, and bland and boring... Guess I have a right to complain, still have the caprice and the truck.
Few years ago, I worked at a park brake cable manufacturer that made cables for, you guessed it, GM. They closed doors last fall, and moved all operations to Mexico, and another plant about 120 miles away from here. Some of you guys in Canada and Michigan may have heard of the company, it's Dura Automotive systems. I guess it's like this all over. Might oughtta buy some land, and get a few horses, getting to where hay is cheaper than gas, lol.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: oldraven on June 16, 2005, 02:15:10 PM
Although GM has been in a slump, esspecially this passed six months, things have been looking up this week. As for those 25k jobs, GM as been trying for a dogs age to get the UAW to negotiate on the health care issue, but they have been stonewalling GM every time the topic hits the table. I always thought a Union's job was to, 1) obtain better working environments, benefits packages, competative wages, etc. for it's members, but also to, 2) Ensure job security.
I'm sorry, but if you stonewall your boss with a wage deal, you're going to get let go. The UAW let those 25000 workers down, IMO.
And they're not all fired. The jobs will be phased out by 2008.
Now look at the news this week. The UAW has finally agreed to talk with GM on Health Care packages. They still maintain it's not their fault, but they're willing to talk now. Great for GM, but it sucks for those 25k people who had to put the point accross.
Even more, Pontiac has already sold out ALL Solstices for the coming year. They sold the first 5000 in something like 41 minutes. The GTO is sold out. The Cobalt (and Pursuit in Canada) are selling very well.
GM was working on a Sigma lite platform to make downmarket full size RWD cars, but put that on the back burner to get their all new line of full size Trucks and SUV's out, which will be fall 2006. All will be available with a new hybrid system, which adds an electric motor to the arse end of the transmission. I think their share of full size trucks and SUV's will come back up when that happens.
Buick needs help. That's for sure.
Pontiac is in no danger.
Saturn, with the new sky, will get some more attention, but I just don't see hardly any Ions or Vue's on the road, and never an L series. They Sky though, hot car, and I'd own one if they put something beefier under the hood.
And finally, GM stock has gone up, after news of UAW talkshiznit the air, by 8.5% (+$2.40ish). The highest they've been in three months.
Bottom line, they've got so much capitol, and are still the worlds largest corporation, so they will not be going under. The finances of GM/Hughes can pull them out of anything.
That said, GM needs to start taking more chances. After the Aztec, they're afraid of pushing the envelope, and let other companies test waters first, then jump on board. (PT Cruiser > HHR)
And for **** sakes, if you're puting a 305hp 5.3L small block V8 in the Impala and Monte, make it RWD!
Oh, and the Camaro is comming back in '07. There is talk of a retro job. (letting ford test the waters again) :)
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: oldraven on June 16, 2005, 02:27:14 PM
Quote from: FordTruckFreeek
I know it's really nothing to prove a point, but I've drove 3 GM vehicles in the past 5 years, none for very long. They were: 1994 Chevy Caprice, 1988 Chevy truck, 4x4, w/305 and auto, 1986 Chevy S-series Blazer. The Caprice was the best of the lot, but just like all the other GM stuff, bland and boring. As for the truck and SUV, too heavy, underpowered, and bland and boring... Guess I have a right to complain, still have the caprice and the truck.
To be fair, the 305 was a complete POS motor. Put a real small block under the hood and you'll be happy. ANYTHING but the 305. I'd call it the only SBC failure, EVER.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Beau on June 16, 2005, 04:14:51 PM
To be fair, it IS underpowered, but it's the way Grandpa ordered it. But it's had a lot of quality issues, something an adult driven truck with well under 50,000 miles shouldn't have... Of course, I am biased for Ford :D :hick:
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: 88FoxBird on June 16, 2005, 04:32:13 PM
The 305 aint a bad engine. I'll agree it is under powered, but our Caprice still pretty quick for how big it is. It just needs to be put in something reasonable, I mean come on a truck with a 305? Heck my freinds got a shortbed 1500 and the 4.3 in it is just as good.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: oldraven on June 16, 2005, 05:39:26 PM
Well, mine was completely useless in my truck, and it sucked back fuel like there was no tomorrow. It ran like a top, and didn't burn oil, but it was still a pig.
The 383 owns it in all ways.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: CougarSE on June 16, 2005, 06:02:13 PM
But a 383 is a stroker engine.
In my opinion, I think GM should just kill off its entire lineup and switch to its Ausie platforms. The Monaro, Commodore and Ute are all rear drive fully independant LS1 or v6 ecotec powered. But they are the exact same thing under the skin. There are front drive platforms as well. And currency conversion puts a V8 Six speed four door sedan at 19 grand. Who hear thinks this would not work? If GM did this they would cut there costs and bring themselfs back with record sales with an entire new lineup.
Of course we could all sit back as GM dies and Ford, Chrysler and Toyota become the new Big Three with Nissan trailing slightly.
The GTO is just a rebadged Monaro, only thing differn't is the front headlights, grill and Bonet ( hehe had to say that).
I do think they need a new engine. Pushrods have bent for the last time.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: oldraven on June 16, 2005, 07:30:43 PM
Even if they took only their full size rwd platform over, they could be way ahead.
Who here thinks the GTO should have been a Monte Carlo? It actually looks like the Lumina Monte already, but an evolution. Anyway, the GTO wasn't ready to come back. (should have seen a firebird first)
But the Commodore could have been the restyled Impalla. I don't know. They can fit a V8 before they can ship one over? :disappoin
GM needs to wake up. They know what we want, they just can't help but bucher a great idea. They're doing fairly well with their FWD platforms, they're just selling them to far up the market. Above the malibu, we don't need another FWD car. AWD, sure.
Anyway. I think they may be catching on. This new Cobalt is a pretty good FWD platform, since it has so many Saab designs. I think the new Grand Prix is a nice vehicle though, which is why the Impala is still around I guess, to keep costs down.
Anyway, yeah. Should have been a Monte. I'm tired of NASCAR getting away with backwards FWD's. ;)
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Thunder Chicken on June 16, 2005, 09:08:43 PM
Nope, it shouldn't have been a Monte Carlo. That name's been tarnished beyond repair. The Monte should disappear for a decade or so, enough time to let the world forget about how forgettable it is, and then a new, RWD version should debut.
In the mean time, the GTO should've been a Chevelle :D
I think GM made a big mistake by delaying the new RWD platform. Sure, their truck sales have been sagging, but with gas prices rising trucks are gonna slow down anyway. Surely a mild refreshening could've done the trick for awhile while GM straightened its car line out. Now, by the time they finally do, the 300/Magnum/Charger novelty would have been long worn off and GM will be viewed as coming to the party with too little, too late (as always). GM should've put all of their resources toward invigorating their car lines.
And once again, Ford is not immune. All of Ford's cars, save the Mustang and GT, are absolutely BORING. The Five Hundred is boring enough on its own, but when compared to the 300/Charger/Magnum it's REALLY boring. It's a real shame, too, because another fifty horsepower would have made all the difference and would not have been all that difficult.
Who wants to bet the Five Hundred gets a quicker-than-normal facelift, with less boring looks, more power, and (dare I say it), a V8 option? Ford had better do something, because they bet the farm on the Five Hundred, and considering that I have seen exactly one driving on a public road since its debut (compared to the dozens of 300's and Magnums I see daily), I'd say Ford lost the bet.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Tbird232ci on June 16, 2005, 10:06:09 PM
GM has a lot of nameplates they could use
something id love to see done, and probably many others, is GM using an aussie platform, reworked sheetmetal, and a turbo powerplant, and calling it a Grand National, but theyd easily ruin it
another problem is, no one has cars to compete with some of these imports, the SRT4 (not import), the EVO, the WRX, these cars are *rather* inexpensive, and each runs circles around a stang GT
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: CougarSE on June 16, 2005, 10:16:53 PM
Quote
and considering that I have seen exactly one driving on a public road since its debut (compared to the dozens of 300's and Magnums I see daily), I'd say Ford lost the bet.
I couldn't agree more. If Ford would give the 500 a 4.6 option I believe it would sell more. An AWD V8? The british folk have been blessed with high horsepowered AWD's for years. Hell even puppiesan gets High Powered AWD's.
Ford "should" take the 500, stuff a 4.6 sohc (to keep price down) supercharged V8 and throw a 5 speed behind it. Give it more aggresive styling and hell call it the Galaxy.
GM should Bring the Commodore over, name and all. I would buy one right now.
In saudi arabia the Commodore is sold as a Lumina SS. Same car just chevy badges. And no EGR or Smog equipment.
Rumor has it the Lumina SS was sold in 98 or 99 IN THE US. I havn't been able to locate one though.
Quote
something id love to see done, and probably many others, is GM using an aussie platform, reworked sheetmetal, and a turbo powerplant, and calling it a Grand National, but theyd easily ruin it
Oh please no. As much as I would love to see a new Grand National and actually own a vehicle that would wear that badge I have to say I would not want GM to do that. You are right in saying they would screw it up. And besides it's called the Calias. But I don't know if they still make it.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Thunder Chicken on June 16, 2005, 10:46:25 PM
You'll wait a long time before you see a 4.6 in the Five Hundred - the 4.6 is very wide and heavy, not suited to a FWD vehicle (case in point, the very unsuccessful 95-99 Continental). Besides, I doubt it would fit anyway.
Now, the new V8 offered in the Volvo XC90 (which happens to share its chassis and AWD system with the Five Hundred) would be a natural fit. This V8 is based on the Taurus SHO V8, but stroked & poked to something like 4.4 liters and making over 300 horses. It's a 60-degree engine (meaning it's narrow and relatively light) and was designed to be used in FWD/AWD applications. And producing the engine in mass quantities would make it more economically sensible for the Five Hundred AND the XC90. Economies of scale. It would also give SVT another much needed product. And give it to the cops as well. The Crown Vic is fionally gasping its last, especially with much more modern (and vastly superior) police offerings about to come from Chrysler.
Granted, at a bit over 300 horses it would be no Hemi 300C beater, but it would be close and would certainly give the Chevy Impala SS a run for its money (or, more likely, beat it silly), as well as anything from puppiesan and Korea. Actually, I doubt it would take much to make the engine at least match the 5.7 Hemi's 345 horses (but not likely the 6.1 Hemi's 425). Lose the CVT (which would probably be very short lived behind a V8) and offer up at least a five speed automatic, and preferrably (but extremely unlikely) a six-speed standard. I know I'd drive one if it was done right.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: V8Demon on June 16, 2005, 10:59:00 PM
:iagree:
The XC90 powerplant in the Five Hundred makes sense. An already available motor with good performance would keep costs down and may also make the Five Hundred a more attractive candidate for lucrative contract purchases for high volume orders such as Police vehicles and Taxis.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: ipsd on June 17, 2005, 12:07:19 AM
GMC needs to pull there heads out of there asses. They killed the f car and yes sales weren't the greatest but they don't have any thing to fill that slot. Yes there are to many of the same cars in there platforms. They also have quallity issues. Such as interior and A/C. when I bought a 93 tempo and my buddy bought a 93 caviler. 1yr later his car interior was falling apart and the thing had bad chassis problem and lot of electrical problem. at the 2yr mark Gm bought his car back and gave him a 95 bretta and that car had to have the A/c compressor replaced 4 times in 3yrs that he had it. All the while I had my 93 tempo that I even delivered pizza in and had 285,000 miles on it and nothing major ever. Now why is GM going down You tell me.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: oldraven on June 17, 2005, 11:02:05 AM
A GNX could easily be pulled off, if it's put in the right hands at GM. Namely, Caddilac designers. Tell me you wouldn't kill to see that on the road.
(http://www.sub300.com/gm/c/gnc4.jpg)
This is all Buick really needs to get some much needed attention. Because, I'm not sorry to say, the Lacrosse just isn't doing it.
And I'll say it again. The Camaro is coming back VERY soon. Practically straight out of Lutz' mouth. And we should all know by now, that when Bob says he's going to do something, it gets done.
As for the Monte, I think this is what the Monte needs NOW. Why wait ten years, when you can revive the nameplate in one?
And we're most likely getting a Chevelle, (GM is hinting at that, too) soon after the Camaro hits the streets. And an aside, the Dodge Challenger is on its' way back soon as well. They want a piece of that Pony pie as much as Chevy.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: 20th anny 5.o on June 17, 2005, 12:51:25 PM
Quote from: oldraven
Anyway. I think they may be catching on. This new Cobalt is a pretty good FWD platform, since it has so many Saab designs. I think the new Grand Prix is a nice vehicle though, which is why the Impala is still around I guess, to keep costs down.
They have already botched up the cobolt its a g6 twin now so there goes that.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: oldraven on June 17, 2005, 01:36:14 PM
Quote from: 20th anny 5.o
They have already botched up the cobolt its a g6 twin now so there goes that.
And that's bad because............... ? I think the G6 is a pretty cool unit, for an economy car.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: oldraven on June 17, 2005, 01:46:24 PM
I just found out something interesting about the Solstice. People have been talking of a hi-po version for a while, but no proof has been seen until now. :D
240+hp in a 2800lb car. I imagine this will help Pontiac out a bit.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: thundergrowl on June 17, 2005, 01:53:10 PM
Quote from: oldraven
240+hp in a 2800lb car. I imagine this will help Pontiac out a bit.
IMO it depends on what the price tag is. If it's too high priced because GM has to cover the cost of medical and pensions then it might not sell at all.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: 88FoxBird on June 17, 2005, 02:00:08 PM
Quote from: oldraven
A GNX could easily be pulled off, if it's put in the right hands at GM. Namely, Caddilac designers. Tell me you wouldn't kill to see that on the road.
(http://www.sub300.com/gm/c/gnc4.jpg)
Sorry but I wouldnt. It looks too much like the Cien and I thought it was ugly.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Beau on June 17, 2005, 02:20:08 PM
I agree, as well. Lose the Caddy styling on the grille and headlights/taillights, and give it something more Buickish, I'd even bite on it then! GM needs to do something soon, and hopefully, the new Camaro is worlds better than the last version(s). Hell, what do I know, that's why I'm building my car up the way I like it... *(mumbles something about traction problems and tire purchases)* :hick:
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: oldraven on June 17, 2005, 02:44:47 PM
Quote from: 88FoxBird
Sorry but I wouldnt. It looks too much like the Cien and I thought it was ugly.
Well, it's based on the CTS, so I don't see the Cien in there at all. Agreed, it needs to look Buick, but Buick needs to revise its' look anyway.
But the grille? It's almost identical to the original GNX.
Anyway, I think the idea of a Grand National build on the Sigma platform would be a hot ticket for Buick.
The 177hp Solstice is selling for just under $20k. I can't see the addition of a turbo driving the price up more than 5, and that's assuming they do extensive suspension tuning, and engine management.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Thunder Chicken on June 17, 2005, 03:40:58 PM
The thing you guys have got to realize is that vehcles like the F-body, that GNX photoshop, the GTO, and a possible Chevelle or Monte Carlo woud NOT save GM. These are all niche vehicles with limited markets and questionable profitability. The only thing that will save GM is if it comes up with a well engineered, mid-size, four-door family car that appeals to the masses. The company cannot rely on "car nuts" - in fact, it has done so or far too long now (face it, most of GM's sales come from GM fans and their families, very few come from "outsiders"). GM needs a car that will appeal to people that have ablsolutely no interest in cars and don't really care what the brand name is, so long as the car is modern, stylish, reliable and safe (not necessarily in that order). Toyota and Honda have stolen a HUGE percentage of the north american market by marketing towords non-car people. Your average mide-size four-door buyer simply wants a car. He/she does not care about heritage, brand names, etc. Yes, we like our Mustangs, F-bodies, etc, but we couldn't pay the bills at GM or Ford. The family truckster does that.
GM and Ford both have the unenviable position of having all of their eggs in one basket. For over a decade they neglected their car lines and fought things out on the truck/SUV market (and GM is still doing so, hence the RWD platform project cancellation/postponement). During that time their competitors kept their car lines updated, so a new Taurus (or GM mid size) looks and drives like a 15 year old Camry. And big surprise, the people stay away from them in favour of a NEW Camry. Now, the Asians have their car lines nearly perfected, so they're now starting to attack the domestics' truck lines as well. Of course you can bet your ass that their cars will not suffer for it.
GM and Ford are in big trouble. While it is not likely, it is also not inconceivable that GM could, indeed, fold under the weight of its problems. The few tidbits of good news from GM are nothing when compared to the constant spewing of bad news. Both companies not only need to change their entire lineup, they need to change their entire way of developing, producing and selling cars. The world has passed them, and unless they pull their heads from their asses, the world will leave them behind.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: 20th anny 5.o on June 18, 2005, 09:52:23 AM
Quote from: oldraven
And that's bad because............... ? I think the G6 is a pretty cool unit, for an economy car.
The G6 is bland and uninspired like most of gm's line. Dare we bring up the debochle of the Aztek.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: dominator on June 18, 2005, 11:01:03 AM
I heard yesterday from a GM buddy of mine that the camaro has been canned,not sure if he's right and i can't find any info on it but,it is possible with gm being so stupid latley. If they were smart(which there not,reason i drive a ford)they would retro style the camaro/firebird just like the 67-69 and price them the same as the new stangs. Now you know they won't do that,they may restyle them nicely if they do come out but they will be priced $10 000 over a stang as they have always been and it will hurt there sales big time. As for the gnx,i have seen pics of it(not photoshopped) based on the gto platform with a turbo 6 pushing 450hp. Looks sweet(wish i could find the pics). Now working at chrysler,i will say there designers are A+ and the power ratings there comming out with take the cake over any manufactures right now. Take the SRT-8 line of cars right now with 425hp magnum,300,charger and grand cherokee. They all look sweet with there body kits,performance suspensions,embrodered seats and orange painted 6.1L hemi's. Ford and gm need to wake the hell up and get with the retro names,stylings and hp ratings.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: 20th anny 5.o on June 18, 2005, 02:18:36 PM
Quote from: dominator
Now working at chrysler,i will say there designers are A+
Sorry man just cant really get into any of chryslers models infact they missed the boat with the Charger in my own opinion as well as the magnum. Also they stuff that Hemi into what ever will fit it.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: CougarSE on June 18, 2005, 02:29:07 PM
Quote
Also they stuff that Hemi into what ever will fit it.
Thats a problem? Hell they did that in the sixties and now there doing it again. If there ever was a high dollar muscle car its Hemi powered. Thats what people remember and thats what they want (plus reliability) now that there retired. Its working for Chrysler, and if some soccar mom doesn't want a HEMI she can get a v6. If Daimler-Benz had never purchased Chrysler, dare I say Chrysler would be gone. All this retro styling and these big motors come from Mercedes influince.
Someone may get there hands on GM that brings them back and all that they stood for years ago.
More on the fact that GM steals sales from itself. Just look the next time you drive somewhere, there is a buick, pontiac, olds and a chevy that all share the same chassis. Seems like when one sells, another gets sold.
GM may pull themselfes out of the water if they sell so many cars that they still make profits with this discount they have going on. It would be hard to fix but if they do they need to bring some fresh minds into the company.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Tbird232ci on June 18, 2005, 02:50:44 PM
Quote from: 20th anny 5.o
Sorry man just cant really get into any of chryslers models infact they missed the boat with the Charger in my own opinion as well as the magnum. Also they stuff that Hemi into what ever will fit it.
you may say that, but sales are more important than pleasing every single person
Quote
As for the gnx,i have seen pics of it(not photoshopped) based on the gto platform with a turbo 6 pushing 450hp.
actually, it was photoshopped, it floated around the internet for a good while before people realized it was a chop
a big problem that i see, is the lack of parts interchangability, back in the 80's, Chrysler had the K-car, and every car in the 80's was a K-car, it was a 2 door sports car, a 4 door sports car, 4 door luxury car, a mini-van, and just about every one of them had the turbo option, they were cheap, and were pretty decent cars
and every K-car used the same k-member, and the same rear suspension other than a few cars, many body parts interchanged, most of the interiors interchanged, and parts were cheap, it was a very cheap car to produce, and probably what saved chryslers ass
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Haystack on June 18, 2005, 03:48:59 PM
yeah chrysler is doing alot right. Their parts interchange the way that older ford such as ours do. Dodge is just go the safe way. useing the old fashoned way. They are just getting it right while everyone else is trying to take out puppiesan and the asian cars they are makeing cars the good old fashioned way. Minus being front wheel drive of course, but for the most part front wheel drive is better. easier install for the workers, less cost and better parts. A front wheel drive car is better for alot of people. It is better in rain snow even certain types of accidents. The down side is lanching power and the ability to drift easily. Honestly, no one cares about that. Thunder chicken had it all right. There was nothing else to say. They are makeing good average cars for good average people. They are the only ones that are listening to anybody exept the asian market. Everyone including ford is trying to beat the imports by makeing one. While dodge is makeing an average 4 door car into a better then asian sports car. The average person dosent want a rear wheel drive car. They want a small confertable car that gets good gas miliage.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Haystack on June 18, 2005, 03:53:27 PM
Quote from: Tbird232ci
Chrysler had the K-car, and every car in the 80's was a K-car, it was a 2 door sports car, a 4 door sports car, 4 door luxury car, a mini-van, and just about every one of them had the turbo option, they were cheap, and were pretty decent cars
and every K-car used the same k-member, and the same rear suspension other than a few cars, many body parts interchanged, most of the interiors interchanged, and parts were cheap, it was a very cheap car to produce, and probably what saved chryslers ass
The kcar saved dodges ass. Thank god for the guy the created the mustang.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: 20th anny 5.o on June 18, 2005, 04:13:13 PM
Quote from: CougarSE
It would be hard to fix but if they do they need to bring some fresh minds into the company.
I totally agree all of the american car companys just need to stop check themselves and reevaluate an attack plan on how to get back into good standings.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: V8Demon on June 18, 2005, 07:25:52 PM
Quote
I heard yesterday from a GM buddy of mine that the camaro has been canned,not sure if he's right and i can't find any info on it but,it is possible with gm being so stupid latley.
I heard the same thing about a month ago. I happened upon a gentleman in a blue '04 GTO last night while on patrol and we spoke for a few minutes. He stated that the GTO was to be phased out in '07. The Monaro is undergoing a redesign and apparently between that and the cost of shipping coupled with currency exchange rates means that the LS2 might be limited to the Corvette alone. Costs would be too great to move all the tooling products from Australia to the US for an outdated chassis design that sells approximately 20,000 units a year in the US market. The Cobalt seems like a nice little car. Even has an optional motor with forced induction. Anybody been in one yet?
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Thunder Chicken on June 18, 2005, 08:50:38 PM
The Cobalt is one of the few things that GM has done right in the past three decades: They made a small car that actually doesn't suck. It is at least equal to its competition, and it is selling well because of it. Now if GM could take those lessons and build a decent big car they'd be set.
Haystack: The public does not want RWD? You should probably tell that to Chrysler, who has been selling as many LX cars as it can build, or Ford, who can't keep up with demand for the Mustang, or BMW, or Mercedes, or Lexus, or Infiniti. Hell, just look at how Caddy's fortunes have turned around since the proper set of wheels became driven - people actually WANT Caddies now! Virtually ALL high end cars are RWD or AWD because it is a suerior setup to FWD in every aspect except packaging and snow. And with traction control, even the traction advantage has narrowed down considerably.
The simple fact is that most people do not know (or care) which wheels put the power to the ground. People just don't want to be bored by that $30k+ hunk of iron in the driveway, and both Ford and GM have produced some spectacularly boring cars. Honda Accords and Toyota Camrys may look boring, but they certainly don't drive boring. Ford and GM's offerings both look AND drive boring and it's keeping people away. Boring equals inferior in the minds of consumers. Chrysler has got it spot on with the LX platform, so spot on that an unnamed (probably GM) engineer was quoted as sayinig "We'll soon have vehicles like the 300C" in a car magazine a few months back.
More about brand engineering: It can work, when done right (meaning, when enough is done to differentiate the models). Almost every member of this board agrees that there should be a new Cougar based on the Mustang platform. And every single one of those members agrees that a new Cougar should share the platform, but it should NOT look like a Mustang. Why? Because one Mustang is enough. If a new Cougar shared platform, drivetrain (and performance) with the Mustang but was wrapped in, say, a modern body, it would sell well. It would sell to people who would not buy the Mustang because they don't like the 40 year old styling. It would also cannibalize a few Mustang sales, sure, but who cares? It's still money in FoMoCo's bank. At the end of the day, sales for that platform would significantly increase. At the other end of the spectrum, though, if Ford just removed the chrome pony and installed a kitty head in the grille, and left the rest of the car alone (like they do with the Crown Vic/Grand Marquis clones) overall sales would likely not increase much (if at all).
At the end of the day, though, the public does not care much about the name on a car or which wheels are drivern. They just want a car that doesn't suck. Chrysler and most of the imports are happy to oblige. Ford and GM seem to be willing to let the others sell more cars while they scratch their heads and try to figure out why their brand new car, which is no better than their old car, isn't selling well. Sooner or later they'll learn, or else...
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: CougarSE on June 19, 2005, 09:39:20 AM
On that subject of new Cougars again?
Anyways, there is no Pontiac version of the Cobalt is there? They just have three levels of "tune" for the Cobalt? The only thing about it that I saw and didn't like is the four lug rims. I got to thinking though, that is probably the same bolt pattern as a honda...... And people can cheaply ad rims to there car and begin the rice baking all that sooner. As much as I hate to see cars like that, Its what sells and its what sold 40 years ago. Cheap and easy to fix up. If we had a v8 car that cost as much as a cobalt then we wouldn't have "Tuner Cars".
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Thunder Chicken on June 19, 2005, 10:39:11 AM
Pontiac has a version of the Cobalt in Canada - the Pontiac Pursuit. Oldraven mentioned it earlier. The SS version does not apply to the Pursuit though - it's strictly a Sunfire replacement. It's funny how close USA and Canada are culturally (including economically), but there are still so many differences between the two countries when it comes to cars:
Mercury bowed out of Canada several years ago. You could still buy a Grand Marquis or Marauder, but you had to do it at a Ford dealership. No L-M dealers here anymore. No Sables, no Mountaneers...
Mitsubishi was not available in Canada until about 1999. You could still buy a Mitsubishi product, but it said "Dodge" or "Plymouth" on it. The diamond star was foreign here
Hyundai made its north american debut in Canada two years before the USA. We got the Pony in 1984 (think Korean Chevette). You got the Excel in 1986 (think Korean Dodge Colt)
We could, in theory, buy a Mercedes Smart car if we wanted. That is, if we wanted.
There is no Dodge Neon in Canada since the newest version. There is a Chrysler Neon, and there is a Dodge SX/2.0, a Dodge SRT/4, but no Dodge Neon.
You cannot legally import a US-spec 1989-1993 T-Bird or Cougar into Canada. Those silly motorized rat seat belts USA customers got stuck with do not meet Canadian safety standards. Siince it is illegal to modify seat belts you cannot simply install the Canadian-spec belts. The car cannot be registered or plated here (actually this may have changed somewhat - cars older than 15 years are exempt from the safety rules, so you might be able to bring an '89 in).
All Canadian cars since 1990 have daytime running lights. In order to bring a US-spec car into Canada you must have daytime running lights professionally installed at an authorized (by Canada Customs) shop. You cannot do it yourself.
I'm sure there are other differences as well, but I've derailed this thread enough :D
As for four lug rims - if they can hold up a 3500+ pound Thunderbird or Cougar they can certainly hold up a 2800 pound Cobalt. There is no performance advantage to having five lug wheels
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: EricCoolCats on June 20, 2005, 10:48:38 AM
:bowdown: Preach on, brotha Carm! Gimme an 'Amen' y'all!!! :bowdown::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown:
Local news reported last night that the Lordstown, OH assembly plant where the Cobalt/Pursuit are made may also be getting a new Saturn model to build, as the replacement for the Ion. They confirmed talks but no details have emerged yet. It looks like my area will be spared a lot of the job cuts that GM is talking about, so that's good news, at least for the local economy.
Another thing to consider: those 25,000 jobs that GM is planning to ax? Well, my brother and I were talking about it and he mentioned something. There are a TON of people working at GM that are currently working past their retirement. The first thing GM will do is offer those people buyouts. That could easily mean 5,000+ jobs right there. The 25,000 number means people that won't be working, not people out of a job. Big difference.
Anyhow, if anyone is into GM history, the Lordstown plant opened in the late 1960's and has seen about the biggest roller coaster ride that GM has ever dealt a manufacturing plant. It started building full size Chevrolets, the Impala, then the F-bodies, then the dreaded Chevy Vega and ilk, then--what most car mags call the worst cars ever assembled in North America--the X-CARS! Woohoo! Chevy Citation baby!! Yeah, those were pimp-ass rides there. Fortunately in 1982, Lordstown got the nod to build the J-cars (yes, even that disaster called the Cadillac Cimmaron). And that led to the current Cobalt/Pursuit production. It looks like we're on solid ground here.
BTW, I've been told that the Lordstown plant will probably never be shut down. This is because it is one of only two plants in the United States that can fully convert from automaking to tank- and plane-making within a few days. Should we ever see a war the likes of WWII, Lordstown becomes a strategic assembly plant for the war machine. And also a strategic target, but still...that's kinda cool to know. I guess the plant was designed with that in mind. Pretty smart maneuvering IMO.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: EricCoolCats on June 20, 2005, 10:51:35 AM
Quote
You cannot legally import a US-spec 1989-1993 T-Bird or Cougar into Canada. Those silly motorized rat seat belts USA customers got stuck with do not meet Canadian safety standards. Siince it is illegal to modify seat belts you cannot simply install the Canadian-spec belts. The car cannot be registered or plated here (actually this may have changed somewhat - cars older than 15 years are exempt from the safety rules, so you might be able to bring an '89 in). All Canadian cars since 1990 have daytime running lights. In order to bring a US-spec car into Canada you must have daytime running lights professionally installed at an authorized (by Canada Customs) shop. You cannot do it yourself.
So Carm...if someone on the U.S. side took out the mouse belts and installed normal belts, could the car then be sold and imported to a Canadian? In other words, no Canadian laws would theoretically be broken because all work was done on the U.S. side by an American. Same with the DRL's....would that work if someone wanted to make it easier to sell to a Canadian? Just curious.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Thunder Chicken on June 20, 2005, 11:14:39 AM
Nope - the Canadian customs website says that it is impossible to legally import an 89-93 T-Bird/Cougar from USA into Canada, unless it's a parts car, and if it's a parts car you must be able to show proof that the main chassis of the vehicle has been destroyed within 30 days of bringing it into the country. I'm guessing it's probably because it's illegal to modify seat belts in the USA, too. It's strange, because the electric rats found in Escorts and Saturns (and others, I'm sure) are legal here because they were sold here. It's just the 89-93 T-Bird/Cougar. The website says that it's because the T-Bird/Cougar do not meet Canadian requirements for seat belt anchoring or something like that.
Here's a quote from the document:
Quote
Where a vehicle has been determined by its manufacturer as not meeting Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 210, that vehicle is not eligible for importation into Canada under any cirspoogestances. Canadian legislation does not allow modifications to the seat belt anchorage system. The vehicle meets the Canadian standard at the time of manufacture or it is not eligible for importation into Canada.
[/left] [/b][/size][/font] As for the DRL, the website states that the modification must be done at a government approved shop in Canada, of which there are only a few (just taking it to a dealer won't cut it - they list the approved shops, and there are not many). Trying to argue the fact that the mod was done in the states would likely go nowhere against the red tape
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: dominator on June 20, 2005, 03:18:31 PM
Have to correct you there man. All 3 of the dealers i have worked at have installed many drl's for usa imported cars and they pass safety and are liscensed without any problems. You just must be a liscenced garage to do so,at least in ontario anyways.
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: Thunder Chicken on June 20, 2005, 09:35:01 PM
They must have changed that one in the last ten years, then - when I was at the Saturn store we were one of the "Approved" garages (the only one in Nova Scotia at the time) and I used to do it to many vehicles, not just Saturns. Some vehicles were easy (Saturn offered a kit in its parts catalogue that included a new fuse panel - I ended up with drawers full of old fuse panels, relays, fuses, etc) and some were hard (Trans Am, with hidden headlights, for example). Before Saturn got the OK people had to have it done at Autoport (for those of you who have not seen or heard of Autoport, it is the point of entry for about 95% of the european cars destined for the North American market - the place is enormous, and there are hundreds of thousands of cars there. It's in Dartmouth, NS).
I looked over TPC's website and couldn't find that rule, so they must have removed it. It was, of course, a stupid rule anyway. As long as the freakin' headlights come on with the engine running who the hell cares who made 'em do it???
Title: Re: General Motors
Post by: oldraven on June 21, 2005, 10:14:30 AM
Quote from: Thunder Chicken
(for those of you who have not seen or heard of Autoport, it is the point of entry for about 95% of the european cars destined for the North American market - the place is enormous, and there are hundreds of thousands of cars there. It's in Dartmouth, NS).
I had a friend who was a lot jockey for Autoport. He witnessed, (and no doubt was responsible for) many a pricey misshap while he was there. I seem to recall a story about a Mercedes drifting in the snow. :D