General Motors

Discussion in 'American Muscle' started by PaulK, Mar 27, 2005.

  1. PaulK

    PaulK F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Apr 24, 2004
    Full Name:
    I don't get it. GM is hurting really bad. Loosing quite a bit of money. The cars just aren’t selling.

    So their bright idea is to spend more and revamp their advertising? Are the execs at GM really that dumb?!?!

    I just don't get it. GM, Instead of spending more money on stuff that won’t work, why don’t you wake up! Make cars that people want with qualities that people VALUE. Speaking of qualities, make them better quality.

    Oh and fire the idiots that think advertising is the answer.

    Sorry, I just had to vent. I don't want to see GM go the way of the yugo.
    Does anyone else agree with me or am I just as dumb as GM?

    I was thinking of getting some of their stock at the nice low price, but then I hear stuff like this and I just know its going to plummet further. . .
  2. To remove this ad click here.

  3. tbakowsky

    tbakowsky F1 World Champ
    Professional Ferrari Technician Consultant

    Sep 18, 2002
    The Cold North
    Full Name:
    Its not just you..GM has been in trouble for a fair amount of time now. The only car they have of note is the Corvette which by any standard is an amazing machine.

    The other divisions are terriable. Cadillac has some really ugly looking cars the CTS comes to mind. Pontiac..what were they thinking? Buick is still building the same car they were 15 years ago.

    The only thing GM has going for it other then the Vette are the trucks and SUV's. This is there bread and butter at the momment. The Envoy's and Escalades etc.

    Funny though. They really can't be doing all that bad, when they have just invested 1 billion dollars in the plants here in Canada. But I have yet to see one the the new Cavilaer replacement cars on the road, even though its supposed to be a nice little car. I guess Bob Lutz has failed to bring GM back from the dead.
  4. Fast Shadow

    Fast Shadow Karting

    Dec 18, 2004
    Point Dume, CA
    Full Name:
    It seems to me that GM is weighed down by its own enormity. There are several brands, each with their own managers and their own philosophies.. and it seems like GM corporate tries to accommodate them all while also being dogged by the UAW to no end. I'd say the ridiculous lengths they go to to placate the unions is a big factor in why they're so messed up, when combined with the fact that GM is made up of several large kingdoms with overlapping and sometimes conflicting interests.

    As far as the Corvette being the only interesting model, I'd say that Cadillac is experiencing a rebirth. The CTS-V is a hell of a car, but depreciates like a sinking ship.

    I don't see how any one man could fix all the problems at that company. Same goes for Ford. There are several underlying issues that require the concerted efforts of many powerful individuals to fix.
  5. sampson

    sampson Karting

    Dec 22, 2004
    near Detroit, MI
    Full Name:
    It's really sad to see GM in such a bad spot. Their only recent successes have been the Corvette and the revitalizing of Cadillac. Their large trucks and SUVs are their best sellers, and now GM is rushing to get out the next generation trucks. I'm really hoping that by rushing the introductions that they don't skimp on quality.

    Another bad decision by the management: kill Pontiac or Buick. I'm sorry, but I can't grasp how killing a brand can help them. It really would be sad to see Pontiac disappear, there's just so much history there. And it's a really bad time to kill Buick, right when GM is trying to breathe new life into it.

    I hope that GM can get its act together real quick. Ford is slowly coming back, and Chrysler is doing very well (thanks to the 300C.) I hope that GM can join Ford and Chrysler real quick, so that the god darn Japanese carmakers can be beaten.
  6. resident

    resident Rookie

    Mar 16, 2005
    GM will build a car for me in a few months...the 2006 Pontiac Solstice.

    Cadillac had their best sales last year since 1990 or so.

    While the 2006 STS-V won't match the M5 or E55 AMG, at least it isn't fwd anymore.

    picture of it


    The supercharged Northstar V8: 4.4 liters, 440 hp, 430 lb-ft of torque - 90% of which is available from 2200 to 6000rpm, and VVT.

    This supercharger is worthy of special note - engineers were happy to tell us that this blower operates with some 30% less drag than the Ford GT's supercharger, and the intercooler has 50 cooling fins per inch length of the pipeline.

    the engine
  7. To remove this ad click here.

  8. thecarreaper

    thecarreaper F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Sep 30, 2003
    Full Name:
    when they killed the Firebird Trans Am i gave up on them. and i wont buy a Vette or a Z28 because of it. i will put my money into old stuff( Ferrari, Porsche, Lotus). only the strong survive.

    oh yea, as i die hard former GM guy i LOVE THE NEW MUSTANG!
  9. yesod

    yesod Formula Junior

    Nov 2, 2003
    Full Name:
    Both my father and father-in-law retired from G.M. Even they have became dissatisfied with G.M. products.
  10. Bullfighter

    Bullfighter Two Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Jan 26, 2005
    Fullerton, California
    Full Name:
    Rant/huge post coming on ... apologies in advance:

    I don't know about GM's "successes". The Corvette is a screaming bargain for its power and handling, but the car still has a bad image, and the interior is still cheap-o parts bin stuff. Everything that's great about the car has to be experienced at a track, not on public roads --i.e., the crap interior you get to stare at everyday, but the 180mph stability you get to read about in car mags. I know a couple of girls who would just laugh their a**es off if I bought one. Then the Corvettes are on the same dealer lot as the Chevy Cavalier/Trailblazer/S10 pickups/etc. -- kind of a different feel from going to the BMW, Porsche or Benz dealer, where they can cater to well-off car enthusiasts. Who wants to spend $50K on a Chevy and have the switchgear from a Malibu? Why can't this car be as nice inside as a $35K Audi TT or BMW 325?

    Someone already posted about Cadillac depreciation here. Depreciation is the market's voice as to how desireable a car is in its first few years, and no matter how much horsepower GM pumps into a block-shaped Cadillac sedan the BMW 3-series (current and new model) is just a classier, more invigorating car. So, any Caddy is a good deal as a used car, but you'd have to be a financial moron (or indifferent to the price) to plunk down $50K for a new one. That horrible depreciation turns off a lot of more pragmatic buyers.

    Quality/design? The XRL convertible is just goofy looking, IMHO, and the one I was in at the LA Auto Show had trim parts that had already deteriorated. Smarter money would be on a Mercedes SLK, which holds its value and has a classier image. I think time is going to be unkind to the current gimmicky Cadillac designs, performance notwithstanding. (Ditto for BMW 5- and 7- series, by the way.) Audi and Mercedes seem to routinely crank out classy, nice sedans. Cadillac needs to fire the '70s metal bands and hire some real designers. Take away the Escalade, which is an obese, overpriced Tahoe with a lot of horrid bling, and Cadillac's still on life support.

    Buick is an albatross around GM's neck. They make nothing interesting, and the brand is moribund. If someone asked me what I drove, I would be humiliated to say "Buick." Think about it. They've peddled trash for a generation or more. Ugly cars, mediocre quality. No one under 40 remembers an interesting Buick. The only car they have that I can recall right now (and I'm a car guy) is the Rendezvous, which is like an AWD minivan. Upscale soccer moms want Honda Odyssey's, Toyota Sienna's, or sport utes, so I can't see how Rendezvous is going to save Buick. Even Volkswagen, with quality issues, and ho-hum Acura just crush Buick right now when it comes to panache. For an stylish/upscale family car, Volvo also stomps Buick.

    Pontiac needs the Solstice. It's about 15 years too late, but at least Mazda wouldn't own 100 percent of the affordable sportscar market, and I really like the concept and design (and it's Saturn twin as well). This one could really be a winner, but GM won't make any money on it. Other than Solstice, Pontiac seems to produce overstyled adolescent rental cars. Thank G-d they dumped the tacky Grand Am, but now they have the slow-selling, anonymous looking G6. I hope the Solstice is well-built and saves Pontiac.

    I'm glad NOT to have Rick Wagoner's job as the boss at GM. It's an unwieldy, uninspired conglomerate with no passion and no vision. Even the name is uninspired. BMW, Ferrari, Porsche, Lexus, Infiniti, Jaguar -- they all make you feel something. General Motors sounds like a boring manufacturing company that could make sheet metal screws or light bulbs. Oh wait, that's the other General...

    I don't accept that American companies can't build good cars. My Jeep Liberty looks good, drives great and meets all my daily driver needs admirably. The doors close with a gratifying thunk, the 3.7L engine has a lot of punch and the styling didn't stray too far from the cool Dakar concept vehicle some years back. Not a flagship model by any stretch, but a seriously great vehicle in its price range. All for under $25K, built in Ohio. No issues so far. I chose it over the BMW X3 and Land Rover Freelander. So far, happy customer here.

    I'm not into Hummers, but wow it was cool to see GM buy a manufacturer and not bureaucratize the life out of it. Finally, something distinctive. If Buick and Pontiac died, a lot of us wouldn't notice - provided Saturn kept the Solstic twin going.

    A lot of my opinion, but there... I feel better.

  11. wcelliot

    wcelliot Formula Junior

    May 7, 2004
    Maryland, USA
    Full Name:
    I've always been a GM guy. Still race a Yenko Stinger, daily drive a Northstar Allante.

    But for WAY too many years, GM has been run (into the ground) by marketing instead of engineers.

    The Northstar is one of my favorite engines. Cadillac got it right in 1992 and it allowed the otherwise mediocre cars to remain competitive . And what have they done with it since? In 13 years it's now up 30hp (10%) in the XLR and still the same in everything else...despite being a completely new engine! (None of the bits interchange with my original.) It's sad that the greatest Cadillac right now has a Chevy pushrod V8.

    Styling? Well, I recognize that every car can't be Pininfarina like the Allante (a decent car where marketing completely missed the mark... besides forcing engineering into a FWD platform... most of their target audience would have been happier with a factory convertible Eldo), but the previous generation cars (STS, Eldo) were at least blandly attractive.

    The CTS-V drives wonderfully, but I can't get past the styling. The XLR? Might be another nice driver, but absolutely doomed to fail. I'd take a C6 or even my old Allante over one. Exactly who are they marketing to?

    Don't even get me started on the Camaro/Firebird. Despite being a superior car on paper, why did they keep getting their butts kicked by an ugly Mustang with 50 less hp on a 20 year old chassis? Again I blame marketing. The engineers gave them all they wanted and more, but they couldn't make it sell.

    No complaints on the trucks; still my choice for towing. No complaints on the C6; an awesome car for the money.

    But frankly they can keep everything else. They don't have a "bread and butter" car I'd want to be seen driving. Not sure even Lutz can save them.

  12. To remove this ad click here.

  13. MikeAR303

    MikeAR303 Formula 3

    Dec 23, 2004
    Chicago, IL
    Full Name:
    Why not? They lack innovation, so why have them around at all?

    I'd love to see them go away... and they can take their SUVs and pretend sports cars with them.
  14. Texas Forever

    Texas Forever Four Time F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Apr 28, 2003
    Sadly, it is just as much work to build an ugly car as a pretty one. So why does GM keep building ugly cars? Take the Saturn, please! GM had a chance to reinvent itself, and it went and made ugly cars. Just because they are cheap doesn't mean that they have to be ugly.

    My guess is that the problem is that GM is run by the pencil-necked number crunchers. They need some more car guys.

    Dr "Shame on GM for killing Oldsmobile" Who
  15. stephens

    stephens F1 Rookie
    Lifetime Rossa

    Feb 13, 2004
    Full Name:
    Stephen S
    Back to the original question. The reason GM is spending money on advertising/marketing to try and bail itself out, is because it's signifcantly cheaper and less risky than designing and building new car.
  16. tfazio

    tfazio Formula 3
    Rossa Subscribed

    Apr 20, 2004
    GM has had boring cars for many years now. That isn't the main reason they are in trouble right now. Their real problem is mounting healthcare costs and huge pensions owed to former employees. That is what could break them.

    Cadillac is improving. I think the CTS are STS are good all around cars. But what concerns me is who would want to pay $75K for the STS-V when they could get a Chrysler 300 SRT-8 for $42K out the door. I just don't know how you could justify spending almost twice as much for a car that has similar performance #'s and looks worse IMO. So Cadillac has improved but more competition will make it harder for them to contiune to compete. Depreciation will always be a problem for GM and the other manufacturers who offer a ton of rebates for most of their vehicles.

Share This Page