General Motors

Topic: General Motors (Read 6767 times) previous topic - next topic

Re: General Motors

Reply #45 – 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.

Re: General Motors

Reply #46 – 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 Costs would be too great to move all the tooling products from Australia to the US for an outdated chassis design that sells approximately 20,000 units a year in the US market.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?

Re: General Motors

Reply #47 – 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...

Re: General Motors

Reply #48 – 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".

Re: General Motors

Reply #49 – 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

Re: General Motors

Reply #50 – June 20, 2005, 10:48:38 AM

Preach on, brotha Carm! Gimme an 'Amen' y'all!!!

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.

Re: General Motors

Reply #51 – 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.

Re: General Motors

Reply #52 – 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

Re: General Motors

Reply #53 – 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.

Re: General Motors

Reply #54 – 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???

Re: General Motors

Reply #55 – 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