Smoke Signals?

[Larry]

It is your educational efforts (along with others) that will work well to dispell this association. People like to find negatives.... let's all work to turn that around (not just in our hobby!).
I have some stories about my new Dakota.... but I still love it.
Keep spreading the good word!
Thanks,
Larry

[50scars]

This thread has taken off on a tangent far from my original point--how come, not all that long ago, Pontiac, to name just one brand, could bring out a full line of cars with various body styles, various engines, various transmissions, and get everything out at one time--new model introduction time, along with all the other divisions doing the same thing about the same time. Now they have to dribble out one body style, with one engine, and possibly 2 transmissons, and it takes a long long time for the next edition to arrive. That was my original point. The reason I mentioned Fiero as an example is that while you are touting the economy of it, when it was new, it was pricey, not an economy priced car. Also, being only a 2 seater, it had limited utility as a car when you only have 1. I had things like Sunbeam Alpines, which are only 2 seaters, but they have a pretty decent trunk. There is a space behind the seats where another passenger or two can ride if they are flexible enough--or drunk enough. Fiero has none of that. Solstice makes Fiero look positively cavernous.
The Fiero base price was over $8,000 in 1984. The economy 1000 started at $5600, the Sunbird at $6600, The Phoenix at $7000. The 6000 was only $700 more that a Fiero. By the time I got a radio, steering and brakes, automatic, air, and some other options, mine cost me over $10,000. When it burned up, we replaced it with an 85 Parisienne Brougham, and only spent an additional $1,000 over what we paid for the 84 Fiero. I don't recall what kind of mileage our Fiero got, but it must have been unimpressive. I do recall that we were impressed with the Parisienne because it delivered 25-28 on cruise control, so I suspect that the Fiero didn't deliver much better than that. My company car at that time only got about 15, on a good day. It is true that we replaced the Fiero with a totally different car, mainly because even if the Fiero had been a decent car, we'd have replaced it because it didn't work for us. If she took our son to daycare on the way to work, she couldn't get groceries or take someone to lunch, because she had no place to stow the car seat. It was totally worthless in snow. My Sunbeam is worthless in snow, too. So was my 73 Impala. Worthless in snow is not a unique trait.
Whether the car had the 6 or the 4 is not relevant to the fire problem, because the engine was not the problem, it was wiring. GM has been wiring cars since 1908, so it isn't like it was a new thing they had to master. The point is that they should have put the big engine in there and sold it to the enthusiasts first, for the top dollar, then after things cooled off, bring out the price leaders for people who didn't car all that much about performance.
But the original question remains--how come the factories no longer are able to come out with the full line at new model introduction time? Nobody has addressed that.

[ozpont]

[Larry]

OK.. 'nuff said, let's move to the question.....

Unfortunately, I can only add more questions. Why bother changing the styling when the auto manufacturers have conditioned the public to buy whatever they make, with or without change. It used to be sort of common knowledge that if you bought a M-B you could consider it to remain "in style" for quite a while because they didn't change them much, ever. They had the buyers convinced that this was a good thing while they laughed all the way to the bank cranking out old-after-old-after-old year-after-year-after-year. And, the buyer strutted around all smiles saying "Hey, look. My old car doesn't look old yet." Same thing has happened today, just the buying public is so gullible that they haven't caught on yet.

I also want to know why back in the early '60s the cars could be made with expensive metals and chrome as opposed to plastic and monochromatic, and interiors could be tri-tone with carpet trim, chrome strips, emblems, etc..... AND they could MAKE MONEY on each car. With the plastic stamping and mono paint today, shouldn't the manufacturers be saving a TON of money that they could pass on to the consumer?

Just thought I'd ask.
Thoughts?
Larry

[50scars]

Set a fire, didn't I.



The international market place is not new. GM and Chrysler used their Canadian subsideraries to compete in the international market quite isccessfully. Built volume for the Canadian factories. The independents did rather well there, too. Hudson actually had assembly plants in England and they badged total US models with an english brand. Prior to WWII, Ford sold the heck out of V8-60s in Europe because they put them in lighter bodies than the US ones. Buick was big in England before WWII. Several cars in the Royal fleet were Canadian buiilt Buicks. Even into the late 60s, US built cars were considered to be fine cars in Asia and Europe, and only less tough than the Peugeots in Africa. When I was in Viet Nam, we had to guard our Dodge staff cars because they liked the fact that a Dodge slant 6 would go for ever with little more care than keeping the oil full, and it was actually faster than the things the Europeans were bringing in. They'd steal an unattended Dodge Staff car, which would piss off your passenger who was important enough to have a driver and a car. Even the cheap ass cars the US government bought had interiors as good as what Mercedes and Citroen showed them, and the stitching didn't rot out in 6 months. Even with the import taxes, a car like a Chevy Impala was considered a good buy for the money, due to the room, performance, dependability and low repair / maintenence requirements. In actual use, when compared to cars of similar size, the fuel economy was quite favorable, too. The export suspension was much stiffer than what was sold in the USA. If you can find pictures of the Iranians escaping after the Shah fell, you will note a sea of Chevy Impalas at the border check points, trying to get out. The people abandoned their precision Mercedes and used their Chevys or other American cars to escape when getting there was really important.
In truth, US car makers are building cars at least as good as anyone else, and better than most, adn ahve always done so. My last 2 Chevy Astro Vans went a total of 450,000 miles before I sold them off. My brother is still driving the "newest" one. It had 200,000 when he took it, 4 years ago. I had a GMC full sized pickup (can't spell Sieara well enough to satisfy myself) Pickup. Wife decided she didn't want to be Mother Trucker anymore and went and got a KIA Sorento. Hate to admit it, but the Sorento is a better ride than a Crown Victoria. Of course, the Sorento is a new model, where the Crown Victoria first saw light of day in 1992. The 100,000 mile 10 year warrantee isn' full of leagl jargon,. and they honor it. A headlight bulb went out, and the dealer said that shouldn't have happened, and replaced it--FREE!! Let's see that happen at your local GM dealer. My company car is an Explorer. The Explorer gives the GMC 75 CI of engine, a foot of wheel base, 1000 lbs, and is a Ford. Pulling a Crown Victoria on the trailer at 75 was kind of scary with the GMC. Same trailer, same Crown Victoria, same freeway, I had one hand draped over the top of the wheel of the Explorer, and happened to look down at the speedo and noted that I was tooling along quite comfortably at 85--semis in the left lane were passing me. The Explorer gets better mileage with my 51 on the trailer than the 51 gets if I drive it. With the Explorer, I tow with the big kids in the left lane faster than I have ever driven the 51. I have hooked my trailer to a pal's Tahoe. The Tahoe seems higher and tippier than the Explorer. Mine is 2 wheel drive, his is 4 wheel drive. He has about 50 CI more than I do, but it just won't get on the Freeway like mine will. We have played games on the freeway. Doesn't matter whether it is standing start or rolling at 50, 60, 80, I just stand up and leave. His is a nicer car than mine, but for $15 grand more, it should be.
It is true--we are in an international market--we always have been--it is just that we are not playing the game like we used to do it.
I contend that had the US auto industry simply maintained their position in the world market like they had in the 60s, build quality, design efficiency, etc, Toyota would not be the #1 seller of motor vehicles in the world, GM would still be. We complain about quality falling off in the 70s. Not at all true--in fact, except for a few bad examples, quality incrementally improved every year from when ever you want to start until now. Yep, they stuck their heads out and took some hits. They also stuck their necks out and got no credit for it what so ever.
In case you haven't heard, Toyota's newest and largest plants are in the USA. Toyota Camry has the highest USA content-- not North American-- USA content, of anything sold here. They actually list it that way on the window sticker. Nissan has a model that is close. USA workers are still capable of building the best products in the world and they do it competetively with their wages and benefits because they produce. In fact, the percent of the US GNP that comes from manufacturing is higher now than it was in 1950. The employment in manufacturing is lower because each worker produces a lot more--PRODUCTIVITY--but the bucks they proiduce is a greater part of the GNP than it was in 1950. I have no idea what they make, because you can't find it at Walmart.
I have a number of customers who shipped production to Mexico, and then brought it back to Illinois--true Mexican wages were 78 cents an hour, but compared to Illinois wages around $15 an hour, they got about 35 cents an hour out of them. DAHHHHH!!
So we go back to the original question---HOWCOME??? Excess of Management? Too many MBA's? Too much hassel factor?

HOWCOME...

[lightning]

Gm's retail sales were up 3.6 % in April. However, Rental sales were down a wopping 36%?

The Pontiac G6 was part of GM's mid-size models being up 15%. I do see many G6 Pontiacs on the road. Also, in my New York area, there are many prime time TV ads. and sponsorships of "young" TV programming.

They will never be 3rd. in sales again, but they are re-building the brand name.

The GTO will be back and sitting on the Zeta chassis as the Camaro will enjoy also. The G8 will help, but it will take time and probably a fantastic warranty to help support. Until GM/Pontiac can offer a maintence friendly vehicle.

I do not think they can take sales away from Toyota, Honda, etc.
Plus, new car purchasers come to a dealer with memories of how their old GM product gave them fits. My 21 year old son has a '02 TrailBlazer. The clutch fan went and now he is stuck with a $600 bill to replace the fan? He, like so many other people have to work long hours to make $600. If he is told that Brand X has better cars, he is going there next time! No brand loyality. And, why should he have brand loyalty to a company that has had so many fan clutch problems on the 4.2 litre, but they absolutely refuse to do a recall?

It is only us hard-core enthusiasts that really care about Pontiac brand loyality. We( and including myself) are interested in chrome trim, emblems, 1/4 mile results, and other esthetics, but there are more people out there that care about reliability, safety, gas mileage, and maintence. And that, in my opinion is why GM and Pontiac are failing.

[lightning]

I think the key ingredients for what GM does is astronomical Union Labor Rates, high Health Care insurance, giant salaries to top management. Then add generous helpings of Federal Regulations. To this mix add "losing their ass in the US market" and then you have it. GM today!

Plastics, while lightweight, energy saving and cheap to make (compared with Chrome or metal trims) saves many man hours because it all snaps together with clips, made from plastic. Tri-tone seats always looked great! How about a color chart for available leather or upholstery. Today, it's either Black or Graphite, leather seat facing or cloth.

I think, today's cars are so far superior to the ones of the past. Superior that is, in safety, reliabilty, handling, braking and power. In the looks department, no comparision as with todays cars, they all look the same.

In my opinion, they do not bring out the entire line at one time for some simple reasons. First, if you show everything all at once, the brand name gets forgotten about quickly. GM needs to stay in the publics mind throughout the year and have the press writing about the "new" car coming in two months. They can build "hype" for 12 months.

GM can 'freshin' up the model line, anytime the see fit. And they can also pull the trick that they are currently doing. The GM Sierra pick-up truck can be purchased as a new '07 design or if you like, you can order the Sierra Classic? The Classic is a '07 model with the looks of the old style '99 -'06 trim. Sure is confusing to new truck purchasers when your '07 doesn't look like your neighbors '07, but looks like your friends '02....