GM has alot of great products in the pipeline that seems to be everything the public wants. But GM is dragging their feet in getting them to market, and it's going to cost them dearly. They are being outflanked in seemingly every area from interiors to products, to speed of getting new products to market.

I'm a cheerleader for the home team. I want to see all 3 of our automakers do well, and I appriciate all performance and sports cars, even if they are vehicles I personally wouldn't buy. In short, I want GM to do well as I would Ford and Chrysler. I should need to really have a hard time picking a car to buy. Right now, short of a car GM imports fron another country, there isn't a single car I'd buy from GM. Not ONE!

I would consider a 300C, Magnum Hemi, or SRT-4 from Chrysler. I'd consider the new Mustang GT, and the Maurader from Ford, I'd even consider the Focus hatchback or the new 500, depending on the reason I was buying the car. But GM? Short of the GTO, Zilch. Nada. Nothing. The CTSv looked good if I came into some extra money, but after checking out & driving the 300C, I now know a easy way to get the same quality & performance, and have an extra $15,000 in my pocket for other crazy stuff.

GM does have some good things coming. But you have to ask, why is it taking them so long to do these things.

There is the Solstice sports car, quite possibly the 1st affordable 2 passenger sports car GM has ever made. Saturn and Chevrolet are also getting versions of this chassis which at least in appearence & componentry looks like and is as sophisticated as the Corvette. But the 1st Solstice won't hit the showrooms till late summer-fall 2005! This is despite the fact we 1st saw the car in 2002!

The Lambda minivans seem like they are going to be pretty good. Though no maker is spending great money on changing the way minivans look, Ford managed to pack more punch under the hood euro-quality interiors & new safety & convience, Chrysler invented new folding seats that completely stow into the floor, full length side airbags seem to be the norm on all the competitors, yet GM chose to mark time with labeling mumbo-jumbo and front ends that are questionable at best. The upcoming Lambdas may change that, but they are also at least a couple of years into the future.

GM is also planing a host of RWD sedans. With Holden, a division infamous for doing so much with so little that they can do anything with nothing, a new high speed link between all GM's design departments, massive computing abilities that university scientist would envy, and a whole host of cars that can trace their chassis history to before half the members of this board were born, you'd expect these new sedans coming up soon. Guess what? It's cash strapped, conservative Mercedes run, Chrysler that's producing RWD sedans 1st. Ford may even get new RWD sedans before Chevy & Pontiac do.

What's worse? GM planned RWD to be aspirational. This means, the top drawer and sports cars would have them 1st, then it would slowly filter down to the rest of their lineup. $23,000 Chrysler 300s have cropped up all over the west coast like weeds, dealers can't keep 300C on the lots, and the cars "supposedly" were just introduced a week ago. Here we have a RWD car with Mercedes components selling for a lower base price than FWD Impalas carrying a chassis & components from the 1980s! Styling debates aside, which do you think the value hunting public will buy?

GM isn't equipted to be innovative. The way GM is set up (as was so correctly described in another thread) is that someone comes up with an idea, and then the GM bureacracy finds a way to kill it, water it down, or grind it's progress to production to molasses-in-winter speed.

GM can move quickly when someone takes a blowtorch to their rear end. The Corvair was GM's sports car till early sales figures of the new Mustang came in. Suddenly, GM got serious & created the Camaro in less than 2 1/2 years... without a supercomputer or virtural reality design departments. Another instance where GM got a kick in the butt was in the 1970s. The energy crisis hit the US in 1973. Fuel standards were decided in 1974. GM had all new downsized big cars in 1977. GM did every single large car they had in less time than it took to develop the Solstice, a car supposedly ramrodded through GM!

It's easy to blame GM's current troubles on the previous management, I do it all the time. But the same thing happened in the 70s, the 80s, and pre-Zarella 90s. GM sits on things without investment for way too long, and then take forever to figure out how to get a replacement to market.

But the time for excuses is over. The automobile industry is shifting into hyperdrive. Both Ford & Chrysler have a bewildering amount of products coming out over the next couple of years. The Japaneese are set to return RWD performance cars to the US. It's becoming obvious to everyone that cars DO sell as long as there is something that makes it special. Otherwise, the family SUV or minivan will do just fine. Impalas sell because people are paid to buy them. Grand Prixs are seen as just a better made rental car.

Chrysler, long an example of cheap components, is now a quality carmaker if Pacifica, Crossfire, and the LX cars are examples. The new Grand Prix & Cadillac CTS interiors, while a step in the right direction, don't measure up to the attention to detail, and general feel in quality to what both Ford and (gasp!!) Chrysler is putting together.

A year ago, GM bragged that it could get a car from idea to production in as little as 18 to 24 months. Where is this example?? Colbalt was initiated back in 2000, and it will be out in August...finally.

Impala & Monte Carlo will will be rebodied next year on it's existing "W" chassis (slightly modified & called "mid-lux"). Yet, just a few months after it comes out, GM will start producing the new RWD Zeta-based Buick sedan. Impala MAY get RWD by 2008. Till then, even if Chevrolet does get the Caprice, it's going to be positioned above the Impala and have a 5.3 V8... and likely to be priced alongside the 300C!

Supercomputers, Virtural Reality design studios, streamlined development cycles, and all the other things GM says cuts time bringing things to market is a waste of money. GM's problem is organizational. If GM made cars in the 60s in 2 years, created a line of 5 full sized cars from the ground up in the 70s, but has to ram the Solstice through the system to get it out in 4 years, technology isn't the problem.

 

Rough weekend Guy?

Ummm... a little harsh, but points well taken.
This is along the same lines as Charlie's thread last week, with a little different twist.

My comment there was not so much how long it was taking them to get products out, but the fact that other companies are not going to stand still for the next 3-4 years while GM is doing it. They will be continually moving ahead too.

Save for Caddy, GM is kindof in a little funk zone right now.
It happens to the best from time to time. They just need to start pulling out of it soon, that's all.

 

GUION FOR GM CHAIRMAN

 

Here, here!

There is not a single new GM car I would buy today. If I had to buy a new car, the new Mustang and the new 300C would get long, hard looks.

Why these two very different cars? VALUE. The 300C is reverse sticker shock. Every indication has the Mustang being the same. Chrysler seems have freed themselves of the "class competitive" mindset that keeps everyone from DELIVERING VALUE THAT CANNOT BE IGNORED. Ford has a segment to themselves, and seems dead-set on keeping it.

GM? Well, I can hope the new Z06 doesn't settle for "too little, too late." The Solstice looks nice. And whatever new Camaro that's in the works will probably be a good car, as well.

Why can't they happen faster? Guion's point about delivering new cars in 2.5 years in the 60s is well-taken.

Why can't they offer more colors and choices? Sorry, but there didn't seem to be a problem with 8 interior colors and 20 exterior colors on the Mustangs of the 60s, even without the wonders of outsourcing and robots and computers and all the wonderful modern stuff that's supposed to make our lives easier.

Why can't they deliver more value? It seems that GM looks around the market, decides which segment they want to be in, and prices the car equal to or greater than their competition. This mindset doesn't apply to the 300C. What segment is it in? Does it compete with the Impala, or the CTS? The 5-series, or an Acura TL? Or something even more expensive? Or something even cheaper? Does it matter?

GM: If you want to take market share, DON'T FOLLOW THE RULES.

Chrysler seems to have learned this. And if they put a 6.1 Hemi in a compelling car that may or may not compete with the Camaro, GTO, M3, Corvette, G35, and things both more or less expensive, GM may not get my next new car purchase, even if the Z06 is all that it can be.

 

Yea, drove to Phoenix from Monterey for the weekend. Just under 700 miles each way.

11 hours down. Only 9 1/2 hours back.

Yes, that's through the LA-Pasedena area.

Don't try this yourselves.

 

yeah, i think GM performance has too many of their hopes pinned on the C6...granted, it's an utterly fantastic car that any of us here would love to have, but unless they want to make 100,000 more per year to bring the price down, GM needs to focus their attention to creating other performance options...

Man..it doesn't seem that long ago that GM was the undisputed #1 in performance, but just like that, we're THIRD(!) among the domestics!! How did this EVER happen, with DCX slithering their way to the top??

 

i don't know what to think anymore. at first i was sad cause of no more Camaro. Then happy cause they were bringing it back. then mad cause i figured that might make them bring it back sooner if i showed i was mad. then mad again cause i have a feeling they will screw something up, weather its the design, power, price, dealermarkup, whatever. now i just don't care.:blah: if it comes out woopty do. maybe i will be out of college and can afford one, maybe not. maybe i will be dead in 4 years, who knows. i know it wont be low, muscular looking, have wide tires, low roofline, or big block. well...maybe a bigblock, but you can add 10k to the price. its not like i don't like guionm or red planet, i know they are working and pushing hard for the car we really want(along with many others we don't know about on this site). its just that i know Lutz will f*ck it up. by the time he finally does let the Camaro come back, he will be complaining saying, no we don't need lowprofile tires, no we don't need to get to 60 that fast. Lutz never did care for cars...he probably doesn't even have anything worth mentioning, and if he did it would be to show off of some nonsense, hes just a poser, some corporate guy with no sense of american values.

 

I just heard that Honda will have some displacement on demand on their new minivan.

GM was first to talk about implementing this tech into their 6's and 8's, yet Chrysler has already beat them to the market, and now Honda is threatining to do that as well.

 

guionM, you wouldn't even buy a C6 (assuming money isn't a problem)

The Only GM cars I would buy that are currently built are the Corvette, CTS, and GTO. I really like GMs truck line up although the full size line-up is getting old and the TB needs a new interior/dash.

The STS, G6, and Cobalt look like great products, I would probably buy them if I was looking for a car in those segments.

 

Very good post! I agree whole heartedly...GM is a big disappointment as of late. It seems that they do a lot of talking with little walking. I hope some brass at GM takes a gander at this thread and it lights a fire in their short pants

 

#1. I have about as much pull as you do regarding Camaro. Red's the guy you need to talk to. He relays all the info & feedback from Camaro owners to the Vehicle line executive & related people in order to make a better Camaro. If Camaro comes out screwed up, it's because they got bad info or it got chopped up by the people that take what we want vs what they can actually do.

#2. You really should read up on Bob Lutz, because every single thing you said about him is pretty untrue.

I was sticking to cars that are currently out. All the cars you mentioned, STS, G6, & Cobalt, won't be out for months.

To be honest, although I think the C5 is destined to become a classic, I don't like the new C6 at all. It has great performance & handling, but there isn't anything else I like about it. Styling is subjective, and I won't criticize anyone who loves the C6's styling, but it's just not my taste.

It's interior, although light years better in quality doesn't say Corvette anymore. Euro styling looks good inside a Porsche, but if the Corvette guys made the old interior the new higher quality way, I'd be OK with that. On the outside, compared to the C5's classic styling, the C6 looks like impressionist art, more tense & highstrung. Kind of like something designed by a person visiting Starbucks for triple expresso shots way too many times.

Of course, if anyone left it under my Christmas tree, I wouldn't return it.

I love the CTS, and until I saw the 300C's price and performance (and interior quality and style) a CTS 3.6 at $30-32,000 would have been my 1st sedan pick. Now, the 300C just completely spoiled me. In about a year or so, you'll be picking up these 300Cs used for 28-30 grand. That's making those same priced used CTSs and new GTPs or supercharged SSs look pretty pathetic.

 

The CTSv is the only GM car that currently interests me...that is....if I were looking to drop 50 grand. As guion mentioned....the 300C has sort of changed my perception of the CTSv though. I still like the Caddy better......but not $15,000-$18,000 better.

Now if rumors of a 6.1 HEMI, six speed, SRT-8 Charger ...for around $35-$37K, are true......I won't even remember what the CTSv looks like.

 

Something must be wrong if redzed starts agreeing with guionM.

Perhaps the biggest disappointment is that after the 2003 50th Anniversary Edition finally brought good taste to the Corvette, the C6 brings back the kitsch with a nasty dose of bad European design. Maybe it's because the C6 combines the stylistic hard points of the early C4 with the front end styling of an ugly Japanese concept car.

I'm starting to wonder if Tom Peters (the Aztec and C6 designer) could single handedly ruin GM?

 

And the CTSv was a bargin compared to the $80K BMW M5

I'd still rather have a 400HP CTSv over a 340hp 300C, But the 300c looks like a Damn good value when stacked up against $35K Euro and *** lux cars, it also puts the Bonnie GXP to shame.

 

Give the C6 a real Corvette front clip and I think everything is fine... I am still trying to get used to that aspect of the car really being on a Corvette.