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.
