I think GM has several vehicle that are hurt pretty bad saleswises by thier interiors.

Bonneville-Everytime is see one I think what a same it is such a horrible interior is in such a nice looking car. Easily could double sales if the interior matched the price class.

Trailblazer-Sells well, but would outsell the Explorer with even a marginal interior.

Impala-Sells well because it is a cheap decent car. Putting a nice interior in the car however could add 25,000 units a year at least.

That is just a quick list. Just to prove my fact, the Gran Prix and it's crappy interior had grown very stale, yet in 04 with the revamp, the Grand Prix had a better year than the older one ever did with a much more questionable exterior design. Crazy thing is, the 04 GP interior is not great either, but it is much less offensive than the 97-03. I describe it as "unoffensive"...meaning unlike the Impala, you won't sit in a GP and go "this is the lamest interior ever". However you also are not going to tell everyone in the world how great your GP interior is either like an Audi owner does.

To me, this means that GM doesn't need to be Audi or even Ford. They just need to make cars that are not offensive/repulsive inside...and let GM's superior build quality do the rest.

While some people will think that is a crazy statement, GM makes some of the high qualty cars on the market. When I say that I mean in terms of being screwed togethor well...not "perceived quality"

Anyway, any opions on my opinion?

 

My hunch is that your estimation of the importance of auto interiors to the average car buyer is waaaaayyy off. I really doubt Bonneville sales would double with a better interior. I spent alot of time in my brothers 99 grand prix GT, and I always thought the interior was quite nice.

 

Actually, perceived interior quality has quite a bit to do with car sales. There was an article published with regards to Volkswagen/Audi. They are not very reliable cars. Or, for the fear of expressing something I do not mean to, let me rephrase. Their quality is not as good as MANY other manufacturers'. Cadillac and Buick have far fewer problems, for example, with build quality. Anyhow.

The survey/study made it clear that people like to buy stuff that they perceive to have quality craftsmanship. And by comparison, even the cheap Golf has interior fit and finish that GM's Cadillac can envy. I am talking about details, and how well the pieces fit together. The dashboard does not have that cheap look to it, and neither do any plastic components.

I was thoroughly disappointed with base Malibu's interior. While an improvement over Malibu Classic, it is still on par with Kia and Hyundai (and I hope those guys will not take my comment offensive). It is very cheap. Period.

Grand Prix has a much better interior. yet, what is the story with these jelly bean styling? Most buttons are crude, large, with poor fitment.

If interior quality did not have much effect on sales, Nissan wouldn't revampt their Altima interior. Obviously they heard enough complaints from car magazines, current owners and potential buyers. And they are responsive enough to do something about it.

GM responds too, but not in the same way. If it will increase sales substantially, then they'll consider performing certain changes. And then perhaps in 3 model years they'll implement it.

 

Shouldn't the topic be which car isn't hurt by their interior?

 

Lots of GM cars have been hurt by their interiors. Some of GM's better interiors ( like new Caddys), haven't necessarilly hurt...but haven't necessarilly helped either. The cars in this class ( Audi, MB, BMW, Jag) have great interiors...a good Cadillac interior is merely the price of entry.....you get no bonus points.

Unlike VW/Audi...who's interiors have been prime selling points...GM is still struggling to stay above mediocrity ( and sometimes failing at that). On a positive note, GM is trying to improve. The problem here is, that the interiors from other manufacturers which GM is benchmarking keep getting better......and GM has soooooooo much catching up to do.

I hope they have it all sorted out in time for Camaro.

 

I think that as of present day, GM's motors, transmissions, frames, etc... (everything that 'counts' underneath) is at least average... often times even well above average or 'excellent', depending on model.

GM's problem doesn't just remain in 'initial' or 'perceived' quality of their interiors. Most of GM's interiors not only look and feel cheap from the beginning, but they don't hold up well to use in the long run either. Compare that to something like the Toyota Tundra. When it first came out, the Tundra's interior was about as visually appealing as the F150's interior. By today's standards, the Tundra's interior is very boring, as it hasn't changed while everyone else has 'modernized'. But you know what? Even compared more modern looking interiors,it'll still stand up to years of abuse without getting 'loose' or random stuff breaking (power windows, latches, etc).

GM still tries to pass their Silverado's 'fischer-price hollow painted pvc plastic dash' interior off on their 50+ thousand dollar SUVs like the Cadillac Escalade, and GMC Yukon Denali. That's just downright embarrasing IMO. Like they don't even care to pretend like they're making an effort.

 

Yeah I havent seen one good GM interior yet...lots of hype about the CTS interior..boy was i ever dissapointed...bland and ugly for sure,especially the passenger side.

One thing I have found is that gm seats totally suck...and where in the hell did they get there letter for the seats.. it looks like freaking cheep plastic (camaro,GP).

 

Any car that came out 2004 or later

The one that need to be redone ASAP are....

- Impala (but this will be fixed with the 2006 model this May)
- TrailBlazer
- Fullsize SUVs over $40K
- All Buicks

All the new Cadillacs are great, GTO & C6 also kick a$$. The new Cobalt looks better than most cars that cost $30K+ http://www.chevrolet.com/i/gallery/c..._gallery01.jpg
http://www.chevrolet.com/i/gallery/c..._gallery03.jpg

 

Branden, you hit on a subject very near & dear to me.

To me interiors are just as important, if not moreso, than a car's exterior. This is where people spend all of their time, and there's more than a few cars that ended off my list because of their interiors. Not just because of cheap materials, but barren looks. I never like BMW interiors till the late 90s. I also dislike the 350Z's interior. I think the early 4th gen Camaro interior is far better looking than the redone ones of post-96.

This is not to say that an ugly car can sell simply by having a great interior (Aztec is proof of this). But a car like the G6 (whose exterior is good looking, but not exactly a work of art), is going to sell to every single person GM gets to sit inside one.

I was on the sidelines on the new Mustang because you KNOW you'll see these things on every corner a month after it comes out. But after actually seeing & sitting inside one, I'm rethinking my GTO plans. If I were to suffer brain damage & buy a brand new truck, it would be a Ford. Not because it's the best deal or the quickest. But because it's interior simply rocks.

GM-NA interiors either seem to be designed for tottlers, or tend to be over industrial looking. CTS and Grand Prix have pretty decent interior quality compared with GM's past efforts. But they seem unfriendly next to the old Chrysler 300s, let alone the current 300/Magnum interiors.

GM's new G6 & Colbalt (and early word is great on Impala's new digs) seem to promise better things are in store without having to take instruction from Holden on how to make an interior look like a place people want to spend time in.

 

That is the one thing that really stuck with me after seeing the interior at a car show (the fully loaded luxurious one of course).

Another compagny that really stped up there interiors...at least in one of there cars is mazda... the mazda3's interior is awesome. IMO, better, less "industrial" then the G6's for instance.

 

The Magnum's interior is nothing special. It also features vast expanses of dark plastic that looks and feels cheap. The LX platform is a good deal for what it is, but let's not pretend you're getting everything in a car that starts around $23,000.....

 

30 thousand bucks?
04+ Acura TL: http://www.acura.com/models/model_ga....asp?module=tl (click on 'interior' and surf around a bit)


Or just get the less dressed up version starting at 15k in the Accord
http://www.hondacars.com/models/inte...e=Accord+Sedan

or
02+ ES300/330:
http://www.lexus.com/models/es/galle...or_photos.html
(This is one interior you have to sit in to full appreciate... everything, and I mean everything has the most thought-out and precise feel to it that you would expect out of even a 50k dollar car


My point here is not to say the Cobalt's interior is bad. It is not. And it's certainly a big step up for GM. I'm just trying to say that cars are constantly getting better, and GM seems to like to be at least one step behind the curve when it comes to quality control and interior designs.

 

Notice I said most, not all. Compare it to a IS300, Buick Park Avenue, Toyota Avalon, Mercury Maurader, or any Nissan. $30K might have been a little much but there are a lot of cars that cost $10,000 more than the Cobalt that don't have an interior as nice.

 

Funny how people on here hype the interior of the '04 Grand Prix as being something so much better than old, and yet I have had several customers trading in Grand Prixs like the old one better...I am included in this group. Maybe some materials are better, but at least the old door panels had actual fabric on them aside from a tiny swath of cloth, and the dash was at least a little soft!! I don't see where the new interior made any real movement forward, IMO...

Anyways, cars that are hurt....

-Grand Ams (thank god the G6 is close)
-TrailBlazer
-LaCrosse to me looks simply ugly (yet the Terazza looks quite nice!!)
-Bonnevilles (C&D's article was dead on)
-All current Buicks save the Rainier


Personally, I don't think most of GM's interiors are as bad as the press makes them out to be...I could be wrong though.

 

Yes, but the flaw in your logic is the you are refering to people who owned the past GP. A past GP owner is almost certain to like the interior of that car since they did after all buy it. Take someone who never owned a Grand Prix, have them sit in say a 1998, then an 04 and ask them which one they like better.

Now I am not saying the 04 Interior is fantasic by todays standards (I have several little things I could list, but on the other hand the older gen looks completly from another generation...much less visually appealing.