morb|d

isn't that like etched in stone somewhere by now? like one of the written laws of GM?

"They're improving but they need to do it faster" is all we've been hearing from the media and saying ourselves for the past 15 years. I keep getting excited about "the future." But frankly, what is future for GM is typically present for everyone else. So by the time they join the party everyone's ready to leave.

Here's hoping for the best. The Buick Enclave really gives me hope. It looks like GM is finally "getting it."

SSbaby

I think that GM's downward spiral began when buyers smartened up to GM's badge engineering approach to selling cars. The other notable mistake was when GM watered down their uniquely American designs and styled their cars as 'Japanese clones'. GM was also slow to embrace the 'technology' wave (though I'm yet to embrace it) when the world seems to be infatuated with DOHC engines, and GM has only recently joined the party. Image is everything and GM have made fundamental flaws over the years and is still paying dearly for its past mistakes.

PS its funny how GM was first on the scene with alternative energy vehicles - over a decade ago (Impulse) - and the concensus seems to be that Toyota have the ascendency on that front, even though they were on the scene after Honda. Like I said, image is everything and Toyota's roots are in small econoboxes even though they now manufacture relatively ineffecient trucks. Sorry to stray off topic.

flowmotion

guionM -- Obviously you misread my post, so let me address a few points.

I'm not a "closet ricer", I'm an out-and-out flaming ricer (by that I mean that Honda and Toyota build more attractive cars than GM and Ford).

I also think that it's unarguable that Honda's styling exercises are much more refined than GM's. You don't have to like the Accord and Civic, but you can admit that the idea and execution is far superior and much more distinctive than genero aeroblobs like the Impala/Lucerne/G6/Cobolt. As long as GM is hampered with the outdated W-Car platform, their mainstream cars are going to be awkwardly proportioned and, well, ugly.

Check the misized sedan marketshare, and more importantly, profits.

I actually really like Camaro's styling, so you are absolutely wrong. However, this is a niche market car, with a rather, um, particular appeal and history. You can fawn over the size of the backseat all you'd like, but any Camaro, and particularlly a retro Camaro is never going to become mainstream transportation again (like it was in the 70s). Camaro will probably sell well, but it sell on Muscle appeal alone.

We're discussing GM's replacement for the middle-of-the-road Chevrolet sedan -- that's how you started your post. That's probably the most important car that GM makes -- it should not be dismissed as just another model.

I believe that "going retro" with the Impala is basically the equivalent of waving the white flag in the face of Toyota and Honda. They tried to compete with Lumina/Impala, faled, and now GM Management just going back to their basic instict of curling up and pretending it's still 1967 and the imports don't exist. Make imports Saturn, or Oldsmobile, or someone else's problem, and keep cranking out the same stuff.

Sure, fawn over PT Crusier and Mustang and Camaro, but the bottom line is they're basically weekend cars sold to folks with a little excess cash. Putting a retro/kitch-mobile at the center of their lineup is a whole different story.

All 100% true,

No Retro had everything to do with it. GM was still in full Retro mode as little as 15 years ago. In the American Public's mind GM==Retro, and not in a good way. We already know that GM can build Boatsided Buicks and Meanlooking Camaros. The challenge is competing with Accords and Camrys.

flowmotion

Press: OMG! Gas prices are going through the roof!!
GM: Hey everyone! New Suburbans!!
Press: WTF?!

GM has to do what GM has to do, but it was pretty much a PR cluster-f. I personally don't think that Prius sells because of any sort of "green" image at Toyota, but primarily because it's a really nice small car that anyone can go buy, and the hybrid bit is just icing on the cake. If GM had any sort of attractive economy car ready at the same time as the big SUVs, it would have helped them a lot.

Z28Wilson

Styling is so utterly subjective it's impossible to base an argument on. "Honda is better than GM because Honda's designs are more refined" has no basis in fact whatsoever. Please explain what a more "refined" design is supposed to be. If you want to say Honda is better because they have better quality, or drive nicer, or last longer, or whatever, at least there is some data that could back up the original premise. But to sit there and tell me the Accord's exterior design is so much more "refined" than G6....



You are absolutely right, that is the challenge. But Chrysler found out, and GM is now figuring out, that you shouldn't try to compete with Camry and Accord by building Camry and Accord clones. The people that want relatively bland Asian cars will always buy Asian. For the rest of us, the Big 3 have a rich and successful design lineage they can mine, and while the cars may have some retro "touches" they will look like nothing that is available across the street, and that's a good thing. I think the success of Chrysler's LX line, and Mustang, prove that there are still a lot of car buyers out there looking for inspiring and UNIQUE American design.

Z28Wilson

So GM is the only car company left building new trucks?

For every 1 Prius Toyota sells, it sells at least 10 full size trucks (which now don't approach the efficiency of your average GMT-900).

Full size trucks still make a hefty profit. You have to build what people want, and there is still a large market for these trucks. Yes, even at $3 a gallon.

JakeRobb

I have to say that there are some really good points in here! This is a great start to the Thread of the Week program.

There was a thread a while back in the 5th gen forum which quoted Bob Lutz saying that Camaro wouldn't be undergoing any clinics. I think this is a big step in the right direction, especially if they apply it to all of the cars. It means that styling isn't going to be muted by a handful of people that don't like it.

GM, realizing that you can't please everyone, decided to try their best not to offend anyone, and ended up not exciting anyone. SSR and CTS were probably the first evidence we saw that took a different path -- I know plenty of people that don't like one or the other, and that's great. Nobody is going to look at any future GM car and say "ho hum, that's boring."

Now, there are a handful more -- H2 and H3, HHR, the entire Cadillac line, the Camaro concept, and apparently the new Impala and Malibu (I haven't seen them). GM is on the right track, and I'm excited to see the results.

90rocz

Whew! I almost spit pop through my nose on that comment...please stop...
Most of Toyota and Honda are "yawn"...boring, to me, talk about "generic aero-blobs" but "I" realize that that's my opinion, and highly subjective, just as your "opinions" are.
Trying to be "like" Honda or Toyota has not worked, people buy and have bought American cars b/c they have American styling, GM is feeling this out, and making appropriate changes.
And I own a Suburban, and no matter if gas gets to $4/gallon, I won't give up the safety and comfort and room that my suburban provides. Gas milage is NOT the most important yardstick to measure a vehicle by, customer satisfaction as in enjoyment, IS.

Chrome383Z

Subjective.


Wow, Camaro was "Mainstream Transportation"??? I think a whole ONE person in my extended family of roughly about 100ppl has EVER owned a Camaro. (Several of which lived in the 60s/70s) And it wasn't a "Daily Driver"... Weird...


I disagree. I believe GM/Ford/Dodge waived the White Flag when they thought all people wanted was "Import Designs"... Had the domestics stayed with "AMERICAN Design" instead of doing a 180 and trying to predict future Import designs - I firmly believe Toyota and Honda would be no more then what Mitsubishi is today and they would STILL have Dominant Market share. The Fat Lady sang when GM ignored all of it's history for something as voluptuous as a Jelly Bean...


That's why I bought my Camaro when I was in college as my primary vehicle... Boy, sure had a lot of extra cash then...


I'm in the American public, and that's not my views. Don't dictate your personal views as being the views of a larger population without data supporting it there bud...


GM taking design cues from their history is what they should have been doing all along. Names of vehicles carry a stigma (domestics - imports don't have the history or even the designs to carry a name). 1,000 years from now an Impala (if the name is still around) should be noticable as an Impala. Granted it might be a rocket ship with a warp drive - but dammit put those 3 tailights on there! History is something that is made, and it's something that you cannot turn your back on. GM can make Jelly Beans, but leave that for brands like Saturn where there is NO history - nothing wrong with that.

But I'm afraid that the Brands/Vehicles that carry history IMO - need to identify with that history...NOT some imitation of Toyota's history.

flowmotion

To all -- Take the grille of an Accord, and you'll still see it as an Accord. Take the grille of the G6, and it's an unidentifable Accord-Clone. Honda's styling might not be exciting, but it is distinctive and very well executed.

You don't to be need a 67 Chevy to outstyle Honda. But you do have to try a little, which GM has been unwilling to do. Apparently there is zero middle-ground with you folks.

As for the Suburban comment, of course they're nice trucks that make a ton of money. All I am saying is that GM should have introduced a zero-profit Diesel Cobolt or something at the same time to appear more green. When writers are slamming your company as "out of touch", that's a bad thing.

Defeatism. Surrender. Wave the White Flag. Declare Bankrupcy.

(Besides, if you don't think Chevy sold bland cars successfully for decades, you're joking yourself.)

Didn't Camaro/Firebird sell in the 300K area for many years? That's pretty damn mainstream.

Well, you got that right. Which is why GM is dumping vehicle names left-and-right. Honestly, if "Impala" had any name value, it's been crapped on by the last several years of product.

JakeRobb

Chrysler sells what, a hundred thousand PTs in a year? I know dozens of people that own them, and every single one is a daily driver.

How did you get that lumped in with the pony cars? Are you serious?