Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Tarmac on April 28, 2004, 12:03:00 PM
-
The last Olds will roll out tomorrow. Another piece of automotive history bites the dust.
My dad still has pictures of the 53 olds he bought when he was a teenager. Still loves talking about hotrodding that thing.
Too bad. Always liked the Alero.
http://money.cnn.com/2004/04/28/pf/autos/olds_dead/index.htm?cnn=yes
A nice summary from the local paper: http://www.lsj.com/xtras/oldsmobile/
-
Too bad the engineering dept. and the sales dept. never got on the same page. Olds lost its niche market(s). The luxury lovers went to Buick and the sports-type went to Pontiac. Olds tried to get the active youth market with the Alero but there just wasn't enough oomph in the styling nor performance to pull them away from Honda, Toyota, and Nissan.
edit: my wife like the Alero, too, but we went with a Civic coupe instead. More car, less money, more sporty, less question about quality.
-
blah oldsmobile hasn't died. GM prolly just decided to "kill" it to bring attention to the emblem. They'll bring back some "revamped olds 442 !!" or something in a few years. General Motors in my opinion isn't what it used to be. Except for the Corvette, what exciting cars do they have? The GTO? Remember all the hype a few months ago about the GTO coming out? The commercials on tv that wouldnt show anything except headlights surrounded in smoke from a burnout? Then they finally unvail it and it looks like a grand prix or grand am. GM is in decline in my opinion. Chrysler has been on the upswing for like ten years. They know how to design an EXCITING car. Not just fast, but fun looking. And they do it all the time. You guys seen the new 300m? or the crossfire? Wild looking cars.
-
First car I bought was a 1961 Delta 88 with a 455 in it. I was 15 (Farmers permit). Got my first ticket in that Olds, too. :)
-
GM cars suck.
GM should have all their designers shot.
The only ones I'm ever remorely intrested in are the Corvette and CTS-V....
Plus GMs brand strategy is idiotic. I'm very happy to see Oldsmobile go...
While they are at it they should cut Buick too and try to shift those sales up to Cadillac and sideways to an improved quality Chevrolet lineup . Also why on earth does GMC exist?
So good riddens Oldsmobile!! Hopefully Buick is next...
-
Hblair
I agree, GM needs to get it's head out. The dropped the F cars, (bad move) and now only have the GTO and Vette?
The GTO should have come out like the new mustang, making it look like an old goat at least a little. Now it is just a midsize V8 car. :(
-
Will Buick be next? They havent made a car thats worth anything since the Grand National..
-
Originally posted by jamusta
Will Buick be next? They havent made a car thats worth anything since the Grand National..
I'm hoping! :)
-
I drive an olds. This sucks! It has treated me well thus far... about 200k on it right now.
Oldsmobile designed the P39's 37mm cannon. Heres hoping Bell/Oldsmobile get together for an anniversary edition P39 :D
-
Yeah, I don't get the buick thing. Buick has nothing going for it. Olds at least had the Alero selling well.
-
screw buicks. olds ripoffs ;)
on second thought, screw you tarmac!
wtg tarmac!
-
wtg oct!
I'm liking a lot of GM's new vehicle lines. Pontiac has a good number of nice looking vehicles. Cadillac's new styling is gorgeous, especially the CTS. Chevys are looking good, except for that smurfy SSR monstrosity. Saturn's new styling is cool - kinda BMW/Mercedes-ish.
-
My dad bought an 04 chev pickup a few months ago. Those dudes are ugly now too. And I don't think it's grow on me this time. The new dodges look much better in my opinion.
-
I had a '75 Cutlass with the 350 hp/4 barrel carb.
It was alot of fun.
-
The oldsmobile 442 was THE muscle car. I remember rarely seeing those once in a while when I was a kid. Just a basic good looking car built on a hotrod engine with a hotrod transmission. A street legal race car. That was an earth shaking, tranny torqing machine, and it came that way right out of the factory. On two rare occasions I remember seeing a Hurst olds, which was basically a sexed up 442.
That's too bad, but really man, when was the last time oldsmobile put out a desirable car ?
-
I had an 80 olds cutlass calais with t-tops and all power options once. Great ride and all. That would have been a better car if it had some power.
-
Nah, i have the new GTO now and love it.
-
Had a "73" "S" type with swivel bucket seats, sport steering wheel, center console, 350 rocket, sweet ride.
-
I've got a 99 Buick Regal, and I have to say it's a pretty darn good car. We bought it a couple years ago when we had our first kid so we'd have a safe vehicle, but with kid #2, we got a Yukon and I inherited the Regal from my wife.
It's got good power, especially for a family car, and it comfortably cruises at around 100mph. My wife used to regularily make the LA to Eugene, OR run (just under 1000 miles) in a 14 hour single shot, and that's with meal breaks at restaurants, gas, and so on. In the Yukon, she can now carry lots more stuff and two kids, but she splits the drive into two parts now.
When it comes to pure quarter mile, the Buick isn't really competetion to anyone, but if you need something with long legs, it's a keeper.
-
Originally posted by Suave
The oldsmobile 442 was THE muscle car.
But what have they done for us lately? Good riddance, Boringmobile.
-
The 'vette and CTS-V are street rockets. Cadillac has seen the light, I hope, and realizes that its future lies in the road racing circuit. I think they've killed their LMP effort and turned it over to the production-based cars, as evidence in the whooping the CTS-V is dishing out to Audi, Acura, and BMW in the Speedvision races.
The Corvette team practically owns the GTS division of ALMS racing. Dodge, Ferrari, and Saleen are battling it out for third at best.
I'm still not quite sure about the GTO. I think the Mustang owns that niche, and with the '05 Mustang speedback, its gonna be a slam-dunk against GM. Pontiac better come up with something before GM becomes a 4-horse team with Chevy covering the low-end lines, Cadillac taking the high-end business, Buick playing the role of Cadillac-wanna-be, and Saturn being the small-car/first-car company.
Everything Pontiac sells, Chevy sells, too. Except for the GTO.
-
Originally posted by Suave
The oldsmobile 442 was THE muscle car. I remember rarely seeing those once in a while when I was a kid. Just a basic good looking car built on a hotrod engine with a hotrod transmission. A street legal race car. That was an earth shaking, tranny torqing machine, and it came that way right out of the factory. On two rare occasions I remember seeing a Hurst olds, which was basically a sexed up 442.
That's too bad, but really man, when was the last time oldsmobile put out a desirable car ?
When I was very little my mom had a 442. She liked it because it was red/orange, looked cool and could roar. She basically used it as minivans are used today, however.
eskimo
-
Gofaster, I think the Niche for classic looking modern cars is big enough to fit botha GTO and the Mustang.
-
Originally posted by jamusta
Will Buick be next? They havent made a car thats worth anything since the Grand National..
I have two Regal T-Types - an 84 and an 87. (Exactly the same thing as a GN but with different color paint and interior). The 84 is a nice highway car, the 87 is really quick.
-
I believe the Regal is the sister of the Olds Aurora.
I heard a rumor that GM was going back to the front engine/RWD platform for some of their cars. I'm hoping that rumor didn't just pertain to the GTO and 'vette.
Maybe we'll get a mid-sized muscle car once again! Woo-hoo!
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Gofaster, I think the Niche for classic looking modern cars is big enough to fit botha GTO and the Mustang.
The problem is, a lot of that market is split now amongst the import ricers on the low end, the BMW 318-series on the high end, and the Mustang and GTO somewhere in between. I think the real potential will be a mid-size RWD sports coupe with a practical back seat and a trunk big enough for 2 sets of golf clubs for less than $30k.
-
Gofaster
The GTO back seat has plenty of room easily fits a six foot person, I agree the trunk is a bit small though, 2 golf bags max.
-
Still driving a 1997 Olds 88 -- best buy for a full size comfy cruiser with timeless lines.
This classic Olds is one of the last cars you sink into, sort of the bottom part of a split level house. Vehicles now are 1 story, 2 stories or 3 stories high. "Command driving position"? Yeah, but tippy too.
Traffic in many U.S. cities is beginning to look like downtown Baghdad with all the big heavy aggressive machinery.
But ... gotta admit, for all-around versatility, still nothing like a good-size van or wagon that seats at least six.
-
Happened because the geniuses at GM (the same ones who gave us Herb Fishel) decided that GM should be like the Borg. All GM cars should be identical to their sister cars in other divisions.
Then they decided to abandon the market that Oldsmobile catered to.
The Oldsmobile buyer was the person who wanted a medium to large semi luxury car with a V8 and rear wheel drive. The Olds 88 and 98 ceased to fit their needs and desires back in the mid eighties. Throughout the eighties, the number one car in the U.S. was the GM G body (Cutlass, Monte Carlo, Regal, and Grand Prix). Number one was the Olds Cutlass. When production ceased in 1988, 3 years after GM wanted it to, the Olds Cutlass was still a top seller. Once they killed the full size V8 rear wheel drive 98/88 and the mid sized V8 rear wheel drive Cutlass, Oldsmobile was doomed.
GM COULD have done a redesign, and built the full frame rear wheel drive cars with aluminum frames and engines, and lightened them up even more, added fuel injection and better computer management for high performance, excellent fuel economy, and low emissions. But they took the cheap way out and screwed the pooch. And the customer.
Rather than build the cars that people WANTED, GM, like the liberal left, decided to build what they thought people should buy and have, and attempted to force them on the public. Lo and behold, sales dropped like a stone. Turns out "we know what's best for you and what you should have" is NOT the way to sell mass quantities of product.
The death of the V8 powered rear wheel drive car, whether full size like the Impala or intermediate like the Monte Carlo, is exactly what drives the mass movement to pick up trucks and SUV class vehicles. The entrance of the minivan caused the death of the large rear wheel drive V8 powered station wagon, again making the SUV a bigger seller.
Being a former mechanic, I can tell you I wouldn't have a minivan if you gave me three. I despise those stamped sheetmetal underpowered front wheel drive flimsy trash cans.
The identity crisis at GM continues. There is no pony car, so they surrender that market to the Mustang, despite the fact that the last F body cars produced were light years ahead of the Mustang. There is no full size V8 rear wheel drive car, so they surrender that market, including the police pursuit cruiser segment (all of whom dearly loved the police version of the Impala SS, which ran and drive circles around Ford's Crown Vic) to Ford. As such, they also give up not only the Chevrolet sales in that market, but also the Buick and Oldsmobile sales as well.
When you charge in excess of $30K for your product, you better make it what people WANT, not what YOU think they should have. The only thing saving GM is the truck divisions and their size. The stupidity runs rampant. If they kill the S-10/S-15 in order to sell only the Colorado/Canyon, they'll lose that market as well.
I am a diehard GM kind guy. I own a 1964 Chevy C-10, a 1965 Chevy Corvair Corsa, a 1970 Chevy C-30 (now a K-30 4X4), a 1981 C-30 Crew Cab Dooley, a 1983 Cutlass Supreme (with a 500 HP 455 4 wheel disc brakes and a narrowed 4.11 posi 12 bolt), a 1984 TType Regal (turbo V6), and a 1998 Firebird.
I'd LIKE to have a new truck to replace the old 1981 junker, but $37K is more than I can afford.
-
All those 4-4-2's are now 'Gold'
-
GM finally figures out that America doesn't need 5 brands of rebadged Chevys.
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
GM finally figures out that America doesn't need 5 brands of rebadged Chevys.
Yes they think we need 4... :rolleyes:
And again why on earth does the GMC brand exist?
-
Cuz that "professional engineering" leads the pack in recalls
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
I'd LIKE to have a new truck to replace the old 1981 junker, but $37K is more than I can afford.
Check out and price an Nissan Titan. If you are serious with what you just said about car companies building the vehicles customers want then you should check out that truck. You will get one hell of a truck for $23,000-$26,000.... It's built in America too!
http://www.nissanusa.com/vehicles/ModelHomePage/0,,24367,00.html
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Yes they think we need 4... :rolleyes:
And again why on earth does the GMC brand exist?
As near as I can tell, GM exists as some sort of make-work program for UAW, and to fill up rental and government fleets.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Check out and price an Nissan Titan. If you are serious with what you just said about car companies building the vehicles customers want then you should check out that truck.
http://www.nissanusa.com/vehicles/ModelHomePage/0,,24367,00.html
Grun,
That truck is less than half the size of my current truck. The trailer I have is bigger than that truck by a factor of at least 4. Besides, that is a known problem vehicle. Nissan is paying wages so low in the plant where it is built the turnover is near the highest in the country. I need a truck with a GVWR of at least 10K pounds.
-
Build a Titan on that website...add 4x4 and you creep up to $26k...then any addons...well, Im not done yet and Im well on the way to $30k.
Damn...no money leftover for carpet in the garage. :p
-
Oh yea, I see you have a real big dooly truck. :)
Well then it seems you are stuck as the high end US models are horribly overpriced. I'm shocked how quickly you can option up a big ford or chevery to near 40k....
Could you perhaps find a newer used one?
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Build a Titan on that website...add 4x4 and you creep up to $26k...then any addons...well, Im not done yet and Im well on the way to $30k.
Damn...no money leftover for carpet in the garage. :p
But look at the content you get at the ~$26,000 level, thats a great value.
-
Titans are pretty impressive. I got a close look at them at the SF car show. As far as manufacturing details and technology and fit and finish, no contest with the domestic stuff. Can't wait to see Toyota build one in this class. Sooner the better, America needs to get out of the auto business and use those resources in areas where we have competitive advantage.
-
Car & Driver TV (Spike TV on the weekends...I think noon time) had a re run of a big car show. One thing that looked impressive to me was Honda's prototype truck. Their SUT looks sharp. Just dunno if Im ready for the sadness of a scratch in a $40k truck :D
-
Pontiac Aztek, Buick Rendevous, Chevy Avalanche.....fugliest watermelon ever built on wheels.
-
1 down (Olds), 4 to go (Chevy, Pontiac, Buick and Caddy)!
(http://www.cnnfn.com/2003/08/14/news/companies/f150/ford.03.jpg)
-
Originally posted by rpm371
1 down (Olds), 4 to go (Chevy, Pontiac, Buick and Caddy)!
(http://www.cnnfn.com/2003/08/14/news/companies/f150/ford.03.jpg)
They are in fact worse off than GM. Despite having the Mustang and a large rear wheel drive car. Even the newest Fords I've driven were remarkably poor.
Especially their trucks. A good friend, a long time Chevy driver, had 3 Fords in three years. Two Powerstrokes and a V10. Even my old worn out 81 Chevy dooley would leave them sitting, towing or not. And all three got worse mileage than my truck. He's got a Duramax now, and it will eat Fords alive, both unloaded and fully laden/towing. The mileage is better as well. Another friend also owns a Powerstroke. Another low fuel mileage gutless wonder. Of those four Fords, and many others, none has been worth crap. My old dooley is a better truck, and my buddy's older Chevy with the much maligned 6.5 turbo will also out pull them, and beat them on mileage too.
-
Originally posted by hblair
blah oldsmobile hasn't died. GM prolly just decided to "kill" it to bring attention to the emblem. They'll bring back some "revamped olds 442 !!" or something in a few years. General Motors in my opinion isn't what it used to be. Except for the Corvette, what exciting cars do they have? The GTO? Remember all the hype a few months ago about the GTO coming out? The commercials on tv that wouldnt show anything except headlights surrounded in smoke from a burnout? Then they finally unvail it and it looks like a grand prix or grand am. GM is in decline in my opinion. Chrysler has been on the upswing for like ten years. They know how to design an EXCITING car. Not just fast, but fun looking. And they do it all the time. You guys seen the new 300m? or the crossfire? Wild looking cars.
Thats because they are ran by mercedes now.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
My old dooley is a better truck, and my buddy's older Chevy with the much maligned 6.5 turbo will also out pull them, and beat them on mileage too.
LOL my bro in law owns a 92 dually with the 6.5. Yeah it runs faster than my 88 Pre-Powerstroke diesel, but that's just the gear ratios. He's had to replace his engine 3 times, too. My old 88 is still chuggin, almost 400,000 miles now with no major breakdowns. I would sell the old thing, or put it out of it's misery...but it is usefull to rub my bro-in-law's nose in it!
He just bought a 2002 Chevy 3500 to replace his 92. This one has a 500 cid gas engine and Allison transmission. It sounds GREAT! The Allison tranny is sweet, too. The problem is the 7 MPG the truck gets. I'll continue to stick with Ford, TYVM.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
They are in fact worse off than GM. Despite having the Mustang and a large rear wheel drive car. Even the newest Fords I've driven were remarkably poor.
Especially their trucks. A good friend, a long time Chevy driver, had 3 Fords in three years. Two Powerstrokes and a V10. Even my old worn out 81 Chevy dooley would leave them sitting, towing or not. And all three got worse mileage than my truck. He's got a Duramax now, and it will eat Fords alive, both unloaded and fully laden/towing. The mileage is better as well. Another friend also owns a Powerstroke. Another low fuel mileage gutless wonder. Of those four Fords, and many others, none has been worth crap. My old dooley is a better truck, and my buddy's older Chevy with the much maligned 6.5 turbo will also out pull them, and beat them on mileage too.
Pulled a few chevys out of mud holes with my poor old ford
(http://home.comcast.net/~c.hambleton/bigred02.JPG)
-
Oh andfor those who dont know.
the engine thats comes in the ford Powerstroke Is made by International harvester.
And the very same engine is what is specd in most ambulances .
the last ambulance I worked on had 200k miles on her and was driven in hard stop and go traffic all day and night(24hr shifts)
It had the same engine as the powerstroke but with out the turbo.
And on average an ambulance weighs in at about 10.000 lbs empty.
So the next time you see one haulin down the street you can bet its got one of those crappy ford motors in it LOL.
LOL duromax now theres another GM **** if there ever was on.
Oh and whats the number one selling vehicle in the world?
you got it baby the FORD F-150
has been for years must be a reason for that huh.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Happened because the geniuses at GM (the same ones who gave us Herb Fishel) decided that GM should be like the Borg. All GM cars should be identical to their sister cars in other divisions.
That was an attempt to cut costs by sharing parts amongst the brands. In theory, its sound and makes sense from a business perspective because it gives consumers more options for dealer servicing. You could get a master brake cylinder or radiator from any GM dealership and be back on the road. What really killed GM from a parts perspective is crappy parts. You're expected to lay out big money on a Cadillac but end up with crappy Chevy parts oriented to budget-minded consumers. GM went with the lowest-cost provider and it nearly killed their business. That's why Saturn was formed with its own manufacturing line and business structure; to avoid the parts problem the other lines were experiencing.
Then they decided to abandon the market that Oldsmobile catered to.
The Oldsmobile buyer was the person who wanted a medium to large semi luxury car with a V8 and rear wheel drive. The Olds 88 and 98 ceased to fit their needs and desires back in the mid eighties. Throughout the eighties, the number one car in the U.S. was the GM G body (Cutlass, Monte Carlo, Regal, and Grand Prix). Number one was the Olds Cutlass. When production ceased in 1988, 3 years after GM wanted it to, the Olds Cutlass was still a top seller. Once they killed the full size V8 rear wheel drive 98/88 and the mid sized V8 rear wheel drive Cutlass, Oldsmobile was doomed.
Federal fleet mileage regulations caused by the energy crisis, plus a change in the consumer market towards more economical cars, prompted the death of the full-sized V8 sedan. Can't blame GM for not wanting to be a dinosaur. But you have a point - Olds could've been the luxury sports sedan division with the only RWD platform for mid-sized cars. Too bad GM wanted all parts to be shared amongst its various lines (except Saturn).
GM COULD have done a redesign, and built the full frame rear wheel drive cars with aluminum frames and engines, and lightened them up even more, added fuel injection and better computer management for high performance, excellent fuel economy, and low emissions. But they took the cheap way out and screwed the pooch. And the customer.
They thought FWD was the wave of the future. Who knew? Every single Honda has been FWD. Toyota since the mid-80's, FWD. Nissan, too. They did it for the inherent non-spin safety of FWD traction. They figured FWD would be cheaper to operate and safer. It was a buzz-word for buyers.
Rather than build the cars that people WANTED, GM, like the liberal left, decided to build what they thought people should buy and have, and attempted to force them on the public. Lo and behold, sales dropped like a stone. Turns out "we know what's best for you and what you should have" is NOT the way to sell mass quantities of product.
Toyota, Honda, Nissan are/were doing quite well for themselves by selling cars they thought the people wanted. GM tried to become like them by axing the big RWD V-8 sedan in an attempt to save their customer market. And they had gov't pressure, too. And the media was agog that gas prices were over a dollar, so smaller economy cars were "the right thing to do". The K-car, as bad as it was, saved Chrysler because it was cheap, economical, and functional (but not much fun to drive).
The death of the V8 powered rear wheel drive car, whether full size like the Impala or intermediate like the Monte Carlo, is exactly what drives the mass movement to pick up trucks and SUV class vehicles. The entrance of the minivan caused the death of the large rear wheel drive V8 powered station wagon, again making the SUV a bigger seller.
Actually, Federal gas mileage regulations killed the big V8 station wagon. The auto manufacturers lobbied and got an exemption for trucks from fed gas mileage reg's, which is how the Cherokee, Jimmy, and Bronco became family haulers in the late '80's/early '90's. The SUV as we know it was an extension of that. The automakers sold us on SUV's because they wanted to avoid selling the fed-regulated V-8 station wagons. And that's how the Chrysler mini-van and Ford Explorer became top sellers in the early '90s.
Being a former mechanic, I can tell you I wouldn't have a minivan if you gave me three. I despise those stamped sheetmetal underpowered front wheel drive flimsy trash cans.
You and me both. Those things take the fun out of driving.
The identity crisis at GM continues. There is no pony car, so they surrender that market to the Mustang, despite the fact that the last F body cars produced were light years ahead of the Mustang. There is no full size V8 rear wheel drive car, so they surrender that market, including the police pursuit cruiser segment (all of whom dearly loved the police version of the Impala SS, which ran and drive circles around Ford's Crown Vic) to Ford. As such, they also give up not only the Chevrolet sales in that market, but also the Buick and Oldsmobile sales as well.
Poor decisions by GM there. Then again, is Ford really selling a lot of Mustangs and Crown Vics? The problem(s) with the 'bird and Camaro was that the styling conjured up images of disco kings, and the build quality was craptacular. I was thinking of getting a Ram Air 'bird until I actually sat in one. I was underwhelmed. It wasn't nearly as good as the '75 Firebird I had as a college student.
When you charge in excess of $30K for your product, you better make it what people WANT, not what YOU think they should have. The only thing saving GM is the truck divisions and their size. The stupidity runs rampant. If they kill the S-10/S-15 in order to sell only the Colorado/Canyon, they'll lose that market as well.
If a car company is relying on trucks to save its bacon, its not-for-long in the market. The Japanese makers see a weakness and will exploit it. How? Conservative styling and better build quality. Dodge better take notice with its Ram. Sure its the best looking truck out there, but it gets a lot of complaints about things breaking.
On the other hand, GM is coming out with some interesting designs. The Pontiac convertible should be interesting if it goes into production. I just hope we don't get a Fiero redux. The GTO disappoints me though - I was hoping for less cheese in the interior color packages. Who wants red leather? Bah.
In my opinion, what really killed Oldsmobile was lackluster styling. Look at some of the consumer stuff coming out of Toyota and Nissan and even Chrysler. The Celica looks pretty sporty. So does the Altima, Xterra, and new Maxima. The PT Cruiser is cool-looking. Even the Honda Element is cool (and practical, if not exactly invigorating to drive). Compare those to the Alero. Any character? Any pizzazz? No, not really. It looks like a Cavalier with a different grill.
I used to think the Bonneville was pretty cool, but Pontiac changed its styling until it became too conservative. Pontiac better find its Driving Excitement before it goes the way of Oldsmobile, too.
-
GM isn't a car company in the normal sense: it's a bank that uses cars to sell loans.
-
The F150 is only number one if you keep Chevy and GMC seperate.
-
Pei,
Your informed. Yes, GMAC (financial divison) makes something like 80% of GM's profit with something like less than 5% of its employees. Lesson? GM can make a lot more money if it goes into the morgage business or even puts the money it spends towards manfaturing cars into a decent CD.
I am a Engineer for General Motors and would say that GM has got some serious problems. In many ways, GM has lost control of its business at the floor level. We (the salaried employes) often say, "the inmates are running the asylum." The inmates are controled by the UAW. Instead of taking the tough road and confronting the UAW on things like work rules and wages- GM (Ford et al) have decided to outsource everything that isn't tied down. The UAW deosn't feel it needs to offer a competivate product at a fair wage- instead it fights to keep acient work rules and bloated wages- for example, our janitor- a UAW member, makes inexcess of $100,000 a year. Because of the UAW's power- first line supervisors on the manufacturing
floor often have a tough time maintaining disipline. Solution- with each new product and plant- we do less and less of the manufacturing work.
On the up side- the CEO- Rick Wagner - is a bean counter and a damn good one. He's smart enough to put a
diehard car guy in charge of design- Bob Lutz- while he counts the beans (are you listening Boeing). New product cycletime
is long, so his touch hasn't been seen in the market completely just yet. Our designs and general build quality are
getting better...much better. If we can survive the weight of our legacy costs (thats what happens when you had 50% of the market share and now less than 25%)- then watch General Motors. I think the public will be very surprised. Just, we won't make much of the Car anymore.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
The F150 is only number one if you keep Chevy and GMC seperate.
Well they choose to bill them selve seprately LOL.
And what was the #1 car before the F-150? the FORD escort LOL.
The only GM product i would have is a vett
but I barely fit in the darn things.