FUTURE PRODUCTS -- GENERAL MOTORS

[thedriver]

You know, at this rate I am surprised that Pontiac won't follow in its Matrix footsteps and reskin a Camry for the new G6.

*sarcasm off*

[ToniCipriani]

You know, at this rate I am surprised that Pontiac won't follow in its Matrix footsteps and reskin a Camry for the new G6.

*sarcasm off*

[sarcasm] G5 gets replaced by a rebadged Corolla, G6 with a Camry, G8 with an Avalon. Oh, while we're at it, Highlander as the Torrent, Sienna as a Montana, and the Prius as a Solstice. See, it all fits! We've got everything covered.[/sarcasm]

And the next minute before you know it, I'm signing the purchase agreement inside a Mazda dealer.

[balthazar]

hyperv6' ->>"I agree that prior to 1977 there were more differances but the GTO was a A body. They may have called it a Fisher body then and today they call it a corperate platform. Times change but other the engines and rear ends they are no different for the most part than todays cars with some styling changes and and different suspension tuning."<<

My issue is completely with your choice of wording and the misleading impression it gives.

Yes, of course the GTO was an A-Body, so was the 442, Gran Sport & SS. And to openly claim Pontiac has long been a "handed-down Chevy" and site this as an example of that is ludicrious and factually incorrect. Thusly, I must call that out.

>>"But everytime I... pull out a Small Block Chevy that was a streaight bolt in to replace the 400 boltin with mounts and bell housing it remind me just how close these cars really were."<<

Lemmee get this straight: the cars were really close because a SBC will bolt into a Pontiac engine bay except for all the points that actually bolt it in (motor mounts & bellhousing) ?? You know you can 'bolt in' a Packard V-8 just as easily....

{ OR were you trying to say a Chevy engine will bolt up to a Pontiac-pattern trans & Pontiac mounts ?? }

>>"I am not saying Pontiac did a bad job on their versions in the 60 but they were still a shared car to a greatr degree."<<

To a "greater degree" than what ??? More than 50% = greater degree ?? You need to be straight on this issue for posterity and credibility, man, and it sure doesn't sound like you're very familiar with the cars of example here.

>>"The 55-57 Nomad and Safari are good exaples of cake with different frosting. The different fenders and engine did not hide the roof line and what it was based on."<<

What what was based on? The Pontiac being based on the Chevy? Different fenders & engine, and that was it?

The Nomad rode a 115" wheelbase while the Safari rode a 122". I'll bet you thought they were on the same frames, right?

A roof stamping does not make for one vehicle being 'based' on another by a country mile.

I own a '59 Buick, been working on it for a number of years now; on the downside of a frame-off resto-mod. I've been thru hell & high water hunting parts and chasing other GM division repro catalogs. Care to guess exactly how much interchanges with a Chevy? And I ask this while offering this factual tidbit: all the other GM B-bodies were.... to use your words... 'based' off the Buick (no; not the other way around... but bear in mind I am using your words here).

[hyperv6]

hyperv6' ->>"I agree that prior to 1977 there were more differances but the GTO was a A body. They may have called it a Fisher body then and today they call it a corperate platform. Times change but other the engines and rear ends they are no different for the most part than todays cars with some styling changes and and different suspension tuning."<<

My issue is completely with your choice of wording and the misleading impression it gives.

Yes, of course the GTO was an A-Body, so was the 442, Gran Sport & SS. And to openly claim Pontiac has long been a "handed-down Chevy" and site this as an example of that is ludicrious and factually incorrect. Thusly, I must call that out.

>>"But everytime I... pull out a Small Block Chevy that was a streaight bolt in to replace the 400 boltin with mounts and bell housing it remind me just how close these cars really were."<<

Lemmee get this straight: the cars were really close because a SBC will bolt into a Pontiac engine bay except for all the points that actually bolt it in (motor mounts & bellhousing) ?? You know you can 'bolt in' a Packard V-8 just as easily....

{ OR were you trying to say a Chevy engine will bolt up to a Pontiac-pattern trans & Pontiac mounts ?? }

>>"I am not saying Pontiac did a bad job on their versions in the 60 but they were still a shared car to a greatr degree."<<

To a "greater degree" than what ??? More than 50% = greater degree ?? You need to be straight on this issue for posterity and credibility, man, and it sure doesn't sound like you're very familiar with the cars of example here.

>>"The 55-57 Nomad and Safari are good exaples of cake with different frosting. The different fenders and engine did not hide the roof line and what it was based on."<<

What what was based on? The Pontiac being based on the Chevy? Different fenders & engine, and that was it?

The Nomad rode a 115" wheelbase while the Safari rode a 122". I'll bet you thought they were on the same frames, right?

A roof stamping does not make for one vehicle being 'based' on another by a country mile.

I own a '59 Buick, been working on it for a number of years now; on the downside of a frame-off resto-mod. I've been thru hell & high water hunting parts and chasing other GM division repro catalogs. Care to guess exactly how much interchanges with a Chevy? And I ask this while offering this factual tidbit: all the other GM B-bodies were.... to use your words... 'based' off the Buick (no; not the other way around... but bear in mind I am using your words here).

You can have your veiw as much as I. While you look at past GM cars for their differances I look at them for thier similarities. It goes back to the saying glass half full or half empty.

I can see the differance in thr Canadian full size Pontiacs with the Chevy frames that lack the wide track suspensions built in the 60's but I also see the full size Pontiac SD cars int he late 60 with 396 engines to. I know they were limited in Canada but it also shows these parts are direct boilt in's. And don't give me that Packard crap as you know what I mean.

You might change a Safari wheel base 7 inches but it was a two door wagon with the same roof line that was developed for a Chevy. I see the cars as near twins [while not identical but similar in many ways]. If Chevy did not have Nomad would Pontiac have not has a Safari?

How many other Pontiacs would have disapeared if Chevy did not have a sister car?

Pontiac and Chevy are tied closer in many way just as was Olds and Buick were.

Either way this is a argument that neither of us will win as it is more on how you view it. If you want to count exact parts you win and if you count similar parts and basic engineering I would win.

The bottom line is today Pontiac is a mess and returning to its past is not the answer. Building great styled cars that are performance based are. Instead of being the great American touring car they just need to be a real touing car period.

Cars like the G5 and Vibe are just not getting it done. I just think it is sad while Chevy has a Cobalt and HHR thas share much they are more different than a G5 is from a Cobalt. It is time GM need to make Pontiac different or based on cars not old here in any form of Chevy. That is why the Solstice and G 6 to me are the only real Pontiacs offered.

They may have hidden the relationships of these vehicles in the past better it all came out in the later years when they did not work as hard to hide them. GM is not fopoling many anymore like for is not fooling anyonw with Mercury.

Automotive Incest is a wicked thing.

Edited September 3, 2008 by hyperv6

[enzl]

Here's the sad truth: In 40 years, noone will be enthusiastically debating the differences between the G5 & Cobalt, or the various Epsilon products...This is what GM has lost--the indefinable qualities that make motorheads debate seemingly minute details.

I'm awestruck by how things have devolved so quickly--the future plans for GM, IMHO, are simply a recipe for further market contraction, rental-grade product and an alarming deaf ear to the direction of the auto industry.

I sincerely hope I'm worng.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Here's the sad truth: In 40 years, noone will be enthusiastically debating the differences between the G5 & Cobalt, or the various Epsilon products...This is what GM has lost--the indefinable qualities that make motorheads debate seemingly minute details.

I'm awestruck by how things have devolved so quickly--the future plans for GM, IMHO, are simply a recipe for further market contraction, rental-grade product and an alarming deaf ear to the direction of the auto industry.

I sincerely hope I'm worng.

+1

It seems that everything I feared (which enzl would constantly bring up) has come to pass.

I hope you're wrong too, my friend.

[cire]

You can have your veiw as much as I. While you look at past GM cars for their differances I look at them for thier similarities. It goes back to the saying glass half full or half empty.

I can see the differance in thr Canadian full size Pontiacs with the Chevy frames that lack the wide track suspensions built in the 60's but I also see the full size Pontiac SD cars int he late 60 with 396 engines to. I know they were limited in Canada but it also shows these parts are direct boilt in's. And don't give me that Packard crap as you know what I mean.

You might change a Safari wheel base 7 inches but it was a two door wagon with the same roof line that was developed for a Chevy. I see the cars as near twins [while not identical but similar in many ways]. If Chevy did not have Nomad would Pontiac have not has a Safari?

How many other Pontiacs would have disapeared if Chevy did not have a sister car?

Pontiac and Chevy are tied closer in many way just as was Olds and Buick were.

Either way this is a argument that neither of us will win as it is more on how you view it. If you want to count exact parts you win and if you count similar parts and basic engineering I would win.

The bottom line is today Pontiac is a mess and returning to its past is not the answer. Building great styled cars that are performance based are. Instead of being the great American touring car they just need to be a real touing car period.

Cars like the G5 and Vibe are just not getting it done. I just think it is sad while Chevy has a Cobalt and HHR thas share much they are more different than a G5 is from a Cobalt. It is time GM need to make Pontiac different or based on cars not old here in any form of Chevy. That is why the Solstice and G 6 to me are the only real Pontiacs offered.

They may have hidden the relationships of these vehicles in the past better it all came out in the later years when they did not work as hard to hide them. GM is not fopoling many anymore like for is not fooling anyonw with Mercury.

Automotive Incest is a wicked thing.

Unfortunately, GM doesn't have the money to do this now (although I don't understand their excuse when they did have the money to do it). At the risk of being repetitive, this is why Pontiac should be aligned with Opel instead of Saturn. Opel represents what Pontiac should be: edgier, sportier, more stylish, and more upscale than Chevrolet. The Insignia and next gen Corsa and Astra would be perfect products to elevate Pontiac back to its rightful place as a bridge between Chevrolet and Buick in GM's brand hierarchy (the three products would need to be augmented by a couple of RWD car products to complete the lineup). The next gen Meriva, Zafira, and Antara could be added to the Terrain and Acadia crossovers to transform GMC into a more market appropriate MPV/crossover brand to complement Pontiac's car lineup (GM would move Buick up to join Cadillac as a FWD luxury vehicle companion brand to Cadillac's RWD luxury car lineup after selling Saab and Hummer). This would make Pontiac/GMC a desirable and competent midmarket dealer network. The 2 brands still have the market image and larger dealership base to make it a successful and prosperous proposition for GM. The transition should begin by the Insignia sedan and wagon replacing the G6 sedan in Pontiac's lineup (I would like to see this car badged as a "Grand Prix", Pontiac should revert back to some of its racy model names from the past to attempt to inject some passion back into its products; the G-numeric model designation system is just too sterile and clinical for Pontiac). Each time a next gen Opel product reaches the market, a North American built replica should take its place in the lineup for either Pontiac or GMC.

If GM does this, what would they do with poor Saturn? I say shut it down (GM doesn't need 2 affordable divisions) or give it mildly restyled Chevy products. Saturn basically appeals to people who want an affordable GM product but don't want to be seen driving a Chevy. To satisfy the needs of this customer, why not take a Chevy product, give it a significantly restyled front/rear treatment and interior, and slap a Saturn badge and model name on it. GM did this in the past to successfully differentiate the last gen Grand Am from the Alero. To the casual observer, the 2 cars were distinct and different products (of course, enthusiasts knew better). Why not duplicate this formula to create products for Saturn? After the Cruze and next gen Malibu are introduced to the public they could be followed by their Saturn counterparts about 6 months later.

Opel's market potential shouldn't be wasted on Saturn. It should be reserved for the 2 brands that have the heritage and dealership base to properly represent and sell Opel's intrinsic brand qualities in the U.S. market: Pontiac and GMC. I apologize for my repetitiveness on this issue, but I wished GM would realize how lucrative this plan would be for Pontiac/GMC and the corporation in general. These 2 historic North American GM brands shouldn't be disrespected and diluted with blatant Chevy clone products any longer! Stop the insanity!

Edited September 3, 2008 by cire

[Sixty8panther]

Pontiac needs a 4, 6 and 8 cylinder Alpha lineup, of varying wheelbase and overall lengths. That's as simple and true a statement I can make.

That's the God's truth... I just can not care anymore.

I refuse to get my hopes & dreams for the GM of

tomorrow to get crushed again. GM stopped being

GM in 1996 as far as I'm concerned... they've made

a few (select) products since then that get an A-

from me but I'm really starting to lose hope.

This future that is starting to crystalize out of the

cafe/rip:zeta/fwd-gallore fog is to me so very

disgusting and sacriligious that I want no part of

it, I do not care about a company that will roll

over and die.

If in a few years GM is nothing but a bunch of

Opel & Daewoo rebadges then WhoTF cares that

the buildings selling them have Pontiac & Cadillac

logos attached toi their roof tops?

Every time I open a thread like this I get a little

closer to just giving up & not caring at all about

modern cars at all. Why flip through an R&T or

read a bunch of links about upcoming cars when

they exhude only compromise & mediocrity.

PCS:

Your giddy attitude, self-righteous posts &

seeminglyupbeat "I told you so" mindset makes

me sick. Honestly I do not care for you and I

feel people like you (with your love of GM's

roll-over-&-die mentality) are destroying any

& everything that I ever loved about GM.

I'd rather see GM die a quick death and get

absolved into Chrysler than see nothing but

&#036;h&#33;ty FWD "2014 Opel Kaddets" roaming the

streets in USA with Chevy & Buick logos

3M taped to their grilles.

[Sixty8panther]

I own a '59 Buick, been working on it for a number of years now; on the downside of a frame-off resto-mod. I've been thru hell & high water hunting parts and chasing other GM division repro catalogs. Care to guess exactly how much interchanges with a Chevy? And I ask this while offering this factual tidbit: all the other GM B-bodies were.... to use your words... 'based' off the Buick (no; not the other way around... but bear in mind I am using your words here).

- door skin (excluding the leading edge of the tailfin)

- glass

- window regulators

- greenhouse (excluding some brightwork)

- lock cylinders

- radiator?

- rear view mirror

- gas cap

- weather stripping for the doors

- door handles, lock pulls

- rochester-sourced carb

- sealed beam headlights

??? That's honestly all I can think of

[hyperv6]

Unfortunately, GM doesn't have the money to do this now (although I don't understand their excuse when they did have the money to do it). At the risk of being repetitive, this is why Pontiac should be aligned with Opel instead of Saturn. Opel represents what Pontiac should be: edgier, sportier, more stylish, and more upscale than Chevrolet. The Insignia and next gen Corsa and Astra would be perfect products to elevate Pontiac back to its rightful place as a bridge between Chevrolet and Buick in GM's brand hierarchy (the three products would need to be augmented by a couple of RWD car products to complete the lineup). The next gen Meriva, Zafira, and Antara could be added to the Terrain and Acadia crossovers to transform GMC into a more market appropriate MPV/crossover brand to complement Pontiac's car lineup (GM would move Buick up to join Cadillac as a FWD luxury vehicle companion brand to Cadillac's RWD luxury car lineup after selling Saab and Hummer). This would make Pontiac/GMC a desirable and competent midmarket dealer network. The 2 brands still have the market image and larger dealership base to make it a successful and prosperous proposition for GM. The transition should begin by the Insignia sedan and wagon replacing the G6 sedan in Pontiac's lineup (I would like to see this car badged as a "Grand Prix", Pontiac should revert back to some of its racy model names from the past to attempt to inject some passion back into its products; the G-numeric model designation system is just too sterile and clinical for Pontiac). Each time a next gen Opel product reaches the market, a North American built replica should take its place in the lineup for either Pontiac or GMC.

If GM does this, what would they do with poor Saturn? I say shut it down (GM doesn't need 2 affordable divisions) or give it mildly restyled Chevy products. Saturn basically appeals to people who want an affordable GM product but don't want to be seen driving a Chevy. To satisfy the needs of this customer, why not take a Chevy product, give it a significantly restyled front/rear treatment and interior, and slap a Saturn badge and model name on it. GM did this in the past to successfully differentiate the last gen Grand Am from the Alero. To the casual observer, the 2 cars were distinct and different products (of course, enthusiasts knew better). Why not duplicate this formula to create products for Saturn? After the Cruze and next gen Malibu are introduced to the public they could be followed by their Saturn counterparts about 6 months later.

Opel's market potential shouldn't be wasted on Saturn. It should be reserved for the 2 brands that have the heritage and dealership base to properly represent and sell Opel's intrinsic brand qualities in the U.S. market: Pontiac and GMC. I apologize for my repetitiveness on this issue, but I wished GM would realize how lucrative this plan would be for Pontiac/GMC and the corporation in general. These 2 historic North American GM brands shouldn't be disrespected and diluted with blatant Chevy clone products any longer! Stop the insanity!

GM could move the divisions to more independent models but they need to stop trying to make each division something for everyone at each division.

IF GM only needs one be all division and that is the value leader Chevy.

If needed take Buick, Pontiac and Saturn and combine them into one dealership and only sell models like the Opels and Holdens they already sell overseas.

Let Buick offer the large near luxury car and let Pontiac only sell a few real world class tuned perfornace cars along with some HSV versions. Then let Saturn sell the Opels that are not copies of Chevy. Make all these premium cars and only sell 4 models per divison. THis would maintain all three brands and give them fresh product not sold by Chevy with out major investment and would also add to the non GM divisions sales.

Kill GMC as it has out lived it's needs if truck sales remain tanked.

The problem is not too many brands but to many models. GM has a world portfolio of cars we don't have that could bring a new face and look to the three divisions that need help.

I know it is a over simple overveiw and a lot of near impossible details would have to be achieved but at this point GM really only needs Chevy and Caddy. Some majore changes need to be made to make the other three brand relivent again.

[balthazar]

hyperv6- >>"You can have your veiw as much as I. While you look at past GM cars for their differances I look at them for thier similarities. It goes back to the saying glass half full or half empty."<<

That only applies at the exact moment the glass is literally 50% full/empty.

Saying a GTO is "Chevelle-based" is a glass 10% full, yet you still want to call it 'half full'. This is like you saying the sky is blue, I say it's red and that 'we each have our own opinions'. Nuts, bolts, rocker arms and crankshafts are not opinions.

BTW- I look at past GM cars for their ACTUALITIES; not apparently agenda-driven interpretations of them.

>>"I can see the differance in thr Canadian full size Pontiacs with the Chevy frames...

...but I also see the full size Pontiac SD cars int he late 60 with 396 engines to. I know they were limited in Canada but it also shows these parts are direct boilt in's."<<

Those are reskinned Chevys; unloved bastards. Canadians got royally screwed with that arrangement.

Bolting a SBC into a Chevy chassis has no bearing whatsoever to bolting a Chevy engine into a Pontiac. Why would you refer to a reskinned Chevy in order to make a point how "close Pontiacs & Chevys are" ?? The Canadian Pontiac is a Chevy. Do you live in Canada, do you only work on Canadian Pontiacs?

BTW: the full-size performance Canadian Pontiacs wore '2+2' badging; the Sport DeLuxes were all Acadians & Beaumonts.

>>"You might change a Safari wheel base 7 inches but it was a two door wagon with the same roof line that was developed for a Chevy."<<

Safari wheelbase was not "changed". The Safari was developed by Pontiac for the Pontiac chassis, the Nomad was developed by Chevy for the Chevy chassis. The roof stamping & greenhouse was developed for both divisions & was shared.

>>"How many other Pontiacs would have disapeared if Chevy did not have a sister car?"<<

Interesting question. Not these for sure :

Bonneville : 1957 >< Impala : 1958

Tempest : 1961 >< Chevy II : 1962

Grand Prix : 1962 (or '69 if you want to stick to the A-Special)>< Monte Carlo : 1970

GTO : 1964 >< Chevelle SS >< 1965

>>"Either way this is a argument that neither of us will win as it is more on how you view it. If you want to count exact parts you win and if you count similar parts and basic engineering I would win."<<

"You can have your view as much as I."

Your "basic engineering" gets you nearly as close to a Fairlane GT as it does to a Chevelle SS.

Boy, for a guy who has professed admiration for vintage PMD, you sure play it loose & sloppy with the facts & insinuations, the result being a continual beating down of the Division's history, breezily excused with a 'you know what I mean'.

Oh well, perhaps you really are more of a Chevy fan.

>>"They may have hidden the relationships of these vehicles in the past better...."<<

There's no "hiding it" in 1955 or 1960 or 1965 (big cars). Safari / Nomad is all right there, out in the open; the greenhouse/roof. Done.

Edited September 4, 2008 by balthazar

[Sixty8panther]

hyperv6:

maybe someday you can attend a car show and look over a '57 Pontiac,'57 Chevrolet,

'57 Buick,'57 Olds & a '57 Cadillac and THEN you can get back to us about the facts ,

right now you're coming off like quite the ignorant arm-chair car fan.

[hyperv6]

hyperv6:

maybe someday you can attend a car show and look over a '57 Pontiac,'57 Chevrolet,

'57 Buick,'57 Olds & a '57 Cadillac and THEN you can get back to us about the facts ,

right now you're coming off like quite the ignorant arm-chair car fan.

What was that Mr B Pillar.

Before you toss out the term Ignorent you had better look at your own comments from the past.

For a long time GM has has some sharing between the lines. As the 50's ended they sharing increases till it hit a low in the 70's. But we all know that.

I have my view and balthazar has his and while I may disagree on some point I still respect his view. He can makes some good points without getting stupid.

As far as I am concerned you were not adding anything here to what he and I were speaking on. If you have nothing positive or helpful to add then but the hell out.

[hyperv6]

hyperv6- >>"You can have your veiw as much as I. While you look at past GM cars for their differances I look at them for thier similarities. It goes back to the saying glass half full or half empty."<<

That only applies at the exact moment the glass is literally 50% full/empty.

Saying a GTO is "Chevelle-based" is a glass 10% full, yet you still want to call it 'half full'. This is like you saying the sky is blue, I say it's red and that 'we each have our own opinions'. Nuts, bolts, rocker arms and crankshafts are not opinions.

BTW- I look at past GM cars for their ACTUALITIES; not apparently agenda-driven interpretations of them.

>>"I can see the differance in thr Canadian full size Pontiacs with the Chevy frames...

...but I also see the full size Pontiac SD cars int he late 60 with 396 engines to. I know they were limited in Canada but it also shows these parts are direct boilt in's."<<

Those are reskinned Chevys; unloved bastards. Canadians got royally screwed with that arrangement.

Bolting a SBC into a Chevy chassis has no bearing whatsoever to bolting a Chevy engine into a Pontiac. Why would you refer to a reskinned Chevy in order to make a point how "close Pontiacs & Chevys are" ?? The Canadian Pontiac is a Chevy. Do you live in Canada, do you only work on Canadian Pontiacs?

BTW: the full-size performance Canadian Pontiacs wore '2+2' badging; the Sport DeLuxes were all Acadians & Beaumonts.

>>"You might change a Safari wheel base 7 inches but it was a two door wagon with the same roof line that was developed for a Chevy."<<

Safari wheelbase was not "changed". The Safari was developed by Pontiac for the Pontiac chassis, the Nomad was developed by Chevy for the Chevy chassis. The roof stamping & greenhouse was developed for both divisions & was shared.

>>"How many other Pontiacs would have disapeared if Chevy did not have a sister car?"<<

Interesting question. Not these for sure :

Bonneville : 1957 >< Impala : 1958

Tempest : 1961 >< Chevy II : 1962

Grand Prix : 1962 (or '69 if you want to stick to the A-Special)>< Monte Carlo : 1970

GTO : 1964 >< Chevelle SS >< 1965

>>"Either way this is a argument that neither of us will win as it is more on how you view it. If you want to count exact parts you win and if you count similar parts and basic engineering I would win."<<

"You can have your view as much as I."

Your "basic engineering" gets you nearly as close to a Fairlane GT as it does to a Chevelle SS.

Boy, for a guy who has professed admiration for vintage PMD, you sure play it loose & sloppy with the facts & insinuations, the result being a continual beating down of the Division's history, breezily excused with a 'you know what I mean'.

Oh well, perhaps you really are more of a Chevy fan.

>>"They may have hidden the relationships of these vehicles in the past better...."<<

There's no "hiding it" in 1955 or 1960 or 1965 (big cars). Safari / Nomad is all right there, out in the open; the greenhouse/roof. Done.

I have spent a lot of time with both Chevy and Pontiac and know how many of the part are the same, shared or interchange with little effort.

In the 50's it was less and grew to what it became in the 70's and 80's. I will give you they were never identical or as bad as it became in the later years.

[Sixty8panther]

Hey look... I bet I can use this radiator shell, fenders & side glass for my '32 Ford.

If it looks close from 25 feet away it MUST be interchangable.

This ain't horse-shoes &/or handgrenades.

[gm4life]

I kind of have to agree with 68 and PCS "told you so attitude" makes me sick as well. Can't we have hope for the next G6... And the Pontiac brand as a whole nothing but some money wouldn't fix.

[Oracle of Delphi]

I kind of have to agree with 68 and PCS "told you so attitude" makes me sick as well. Can't we have hope for the next G6... And the Pontiac brand as a whole nothing but some money wouldn't fix.

Money GM doesn't have.

[ocnblu]

They should at the very least have the money to stamp out a hood, fenders, door skins, quarter panels and deck lid for Pontiac that's different from a Chevrolet, not to mention plastic parts, like lamps, bumper covers, door trim panels and dashboards.

[gm4life]

Thank you Blu, don't you think that could happend PCS? Because you do have the inside loop were as we don't...

[Oracle of Delphi]

GM is using it's resources in other areas. There is not much in the pipeline for Pontiac, that alone speaks volumes.

[Sixty8panther]

GM is using it's resources in other areas. There is not much in the pipeline for Pontiac, that alone speaks volumes.

Too busy pumping billion$$$ into SAABand Saturn.

[gm4life]

They might get new sheet metal, and is there something we don't know?

[balthazar]

hyperv6- >>"I have spent a lot of time with both Chevy and Pontiac and know how many of the part are the same, shared or interchange with little effort."<<

OK; would you then be so kind as to offer up what interchanges between a '59 Pontiac & a '59 Chevy full-size?

>>"In the 50's it was less and grew to what it became in the 70's and 80's. I will give you they were never identical or as bad as it became in the later years."<<

In the '50s it was 10% if we're being generous.

Are we still going to call this "more alike than most people would think", or was the above a retraction of sorts?

>>"He can makes some good points without getting stupid."<<

I try.

[Robert Hall]

So some parts may or may not have interchanged 50 years ago. What does that have to do with the state of GM, circa 2008? Too much obsession with trivia...

[Camino LS6]

It's not trivia, it's heritage.

And we should try to be as accurate about it as possible.

[Sixty8panther]

It's not trivia, it's heritage.

And we should try to be as accurate about it as possible.

AMEN.

That's why I get worked up.... people shoot their mouth

on here about GM & cars in general as if it was the line

at the super market and they were shooting the &#036;h&#33;

about the weather... but I, like many here, am a car

enthusiast to a degree most of you can not appreciate...

To imply that a '57 Pontiac is a '57 Chevy with a different

grille is criminal, I thought the same when I was 12 years

old but now I know better....

[hyperv6]

hyperv6- >>"I have spent a lot of time with both Chevy and Pontiac and know how many of the part are the same, shared or interchange with little effort."<<

OK; would you then be so kind as to offer up what interchanges between a '59 Pontiac & a '59 Chevy full-size?

>>"In the 50's it was less and grew to what it became in the 70's and 80's. I will give you they were never identical or as bad as it became in the later years."<<

In the '50s it was 10% if we're being generous.

Are we still going to call this "more alike than most people would think", or was the above a retraction of sorts?

>>"He can makes some good points without getting stupid."<<

I try.

No retraction just a clairifcation.

At this point it is all has no bearing on todays problems at Pontiac. The pas it just that the past and it is time for some to remember and learn from it but stop living in it.

I am done wasting space on this.

[hyperv6]

I can see GM is cutting back in areas you used to not see it.

I never got a explantion of where they were [Could have been the NHRAS race. But Pontiac at the Pontiaqc Nationals did not have any reps or a display of any kind there this year and that is a first for a long time.

Also I notices the sales books at the dealers for the 09 cars are only half the size as in the past. The Chevy books for the 08 vs 09 are cut nearly in half in size.

I am judging one of the larger Camaro shows in the midwest today and Sunday and it looks like they have not recieved much support this year from Chevy. Last year they got the Bumble Bee for 3 days and nothing so for this year.

I plan on going to the Glenmore Gathering next week where Wayne Cherry and 100 years of GM are feature. I am hoping they have sent a few cars from the historic collection in. Cut back may have hurt there.

Edited September 6, 2008 by hyperv6

[ToniCipriani]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Cruze

Someone posted on the page about a "Pontiac Pursuit" version of the Cruze. Doesn't sound very legit though since they don't even use the Pursuit name anymore...

[balthazar]

moltar- >>"So some parts may or may not have interchanged 50 years ago. What does that have to do with the state of GM, circa 2008? Too much obsession with trivia... "<<

Not sure why you apparently feel compelled to comment on a topic you've repeatedly shown indifference for. You've posted countless anecdotals about your family, friends & co-workers; one might well call it 'too much obsession with anecdotals'...

hyperv6- >>"At this point it is all has no bearing on todays problems at Pontiac. The pas it just that the past and it is time for some to remember and learn from it but stop living in it. I am done wasting space on this."<<

Very good. I look forward to minimized historical misdirection in the future on these pages.

Edited September 7, 2008 by balthazar

[Robert Hall]

To imply that a '57 Pontiac is a '57 Chevy with a different

grille is criminal, I thought the same when I was 12 years

old but now I know better....

The irony is when I was 13, a Pontiac literally was a Chevy with a different grille--the '83 Pontiac Parisiene was a Caprice with a Pontiac grille and different taillight lenses. GMs in the '80s across the CPOB brands seemed to be differentiated primarily on grilles, taillights, and dashboards (sometimes, even the dashes were shared). The oldies had much more differentiation across the brands.

[balthazar]

That's not irony, that's (largely) reality.

Go back to the '60s or earlier and that would be nothing but fantasy.

[Robert Hall]

That's not irony, that's (largely) reality.

Go back to the '60s or earlier and that would be nothing but fantasy.

True.. now in 2008, Pontiac has two badge-engineered Chevies, one platform-shared Toyota, one badge-engineered Holden, and 2 that share platforms w/ other GMs but have unique bodywork and interiors.

[hyperv6]

moltar- >>"So some parts may or may not have interchanged 50 years ago. What does that have to do with the state of GM, circa 2008? Too much obsession with trivia... "<<

Not sure why you apparently feel compelled to comment on a topic you've repeatedly shown indifference for. You've posted countless anecdotals about your family, friends & co-workers; one might well call it 'too much obsession with anecdotals'...

hyperv6- >>"At this point it is all has no bearing on todays problems at Pontiac. The pas it just that the past and it is time for some to remember and learn from it but stop living in it. I am done wasting space on this."<<

Very good. I look forward to minimized historical misdirection in the future on these pages.

Thank you kind sir.

I too look forward at minimizing the overly hair splitting fanatical historical bloviating in the future on these pages.

[hyperv6]

Pontiac while in recent years has been a Chevy based has tried to break free. The problem is it was always limited and done on the cheap as in program wise and usally was low in numbers or just failied.

The Fiero was a good way to help set Pontiac appart but was never funded properly. Pontiac got in 1988 what they wanted in 1984.

The Turbo GP Mclaren was a good idea just excuted poorly.

The STE AWD again a good idea on the cheap.

The SSEI was a good car with the wrong wheel drive. Pontiac did build a RWD V8 version but it never got past the mule car.

The Turbo TA pace car. Something they should have done years before as a sister to the GN.

The Aztec while a good useful vehicle it's styling killed it before it even came out.

There are many other good ideas that were under funded or under suppoerted due to GM politics. Pontiac has tried but those at the corperate lever have just killed them at every turn.

The sad part is I don't see thgat changing and with GM's money problems it does not bode well.

[balthazar]

I too look forward at minimizing the overly hair splitting fanatical historical bloviating in the future on these pages.

Sorry; I never implied anything of the sort on my part.

I am GM's self-appointed historical curator here, teaching the kiddies the unvarnished truth.

Drop BS and I bring the shovel.

[hyperv6]

Sorry; I never implied anything of the sort on my part.

I am GM's self-appointed historical curator here, teaching the kiddies the unvarnished truth.

Drop BS and I bring the shovel.

I will call truce if recipricated.

I think you may have misunderstood where I was coming and I did not explain it well enough. Some of us here know more than given credit for at times.

[balthazar]

And I know one of those persons ('knows more than given credit for') is you, which explains my dismay seeing you esp. post stuff you should know better than to with your brain's eyes closed. Some of it may be in your expression of your idea; true. Understand me tho; if I can interpret it that way, others can, too, and I am compelled to clarify/correct it.

If by truce you mean dropping this discussion in this thread, I'm in.

I have nothing against you personally, but I have much against 'bad history'.

[GMTruckGuy74]

Oh if GM could have given Pontiac some money back in the late '80s/early '90s:

1986 Pontiac Trans Sport

- When did GM lose their focus with the Dustbuster vans??? The '86 TranSport concept, even though it was still a bubble, was 10x better looking than what actually arrived in 1990 (admittedly, I do like the '90-'93 Trans Sport). I feel if GM spent just a little more money on the Dustbuster vans to make them more like the concept, sales would have been better.

1989 Pontiac Stinger

- Take the Chevy/GEO Tracker and rebody it to look like the Stinger concept. While different enough from the Chevy/GEO version, it could have added a youthful, fun and adventurous vehicle to Pontiac's lineup while not totally being too "trucky".

1990 Pontiac Sunfire

- GM should have partnered Pontiac with Saturn for the Sunfire... Pontiac was showcasing the quarter doors long before Saturn got the use of it for the SC Coupe. Pontiac could have put a new metal body on the SC chasis to give a different take instead of using the Cavalier.

1991 Pontiac ProtoSport4

- If GM would have given Pontiac a little more money for the 4-door W-body program, why couldn't this have inspired the new-for'90 Grand Prix sedan? It's definitely sporty than the tall sedan we actually got.

Okay, I'm doing my "armchair" CEO'ing, but here are some exceptional Pontiac concept cars that would have been great as production cars. Instead, in the '90s we got warmed-over, generic shared-GM vehicles. With a little extra money spent on Pontiac, their lineup could have been better in my opinion.

[ocnblu]

It just struck me that the Trans Sport Concept reminds me of a Previa...

[gm4life]

The Previa was a sorry excuse for a vehicle even a Toyota.

[Sixty8panther]

Sorry; I never implied anything of the sort on my part.

I am GM's self-appointed historical curator here, teaching the kiddies the unvarnished truth.

Drop BS and I bring the shovel.

Yes. True.

I for one say thank you.

I'm more than happy to retract an inaccurate

statement from time to time based on your

incredible experience in all things GM, classic

cars, esp. mechanical guts etc... your vast

library (which I witnessed back in 2005) and

seemingly photogrphic memory of the subject

are impressive.

You Sir, are a huge asset to this site and I for

one would feel as is a HUGE chunk would be

missing if you ever left.

As I've mentioned a few times in the past, it

was my buddy Duffy who implanted the seed

of future '59 Buick ownership in my head, so

many moons ago.... and your Avatar of the

angry canted all seeing Invicta headlights was

what made me sit up, take notice and decide

to go balls-deep and get one of the coolest of

the classic 1950s finned wonders.

I look forward to your participation on C&G &

you can bet your nicest set of 8-lug Pontiac

drums that I will be in New Jersey as soon as

humanly possible after the "WQ59B" is done

to get a ride in the sickest custom on the east

coast, bar none!

[balthazar]

That's very nice of you to say, bud (to the point of getting sloppy ).

To tell the truth, my (very low) interest in new/modern cars is kinda inexplicable; there's so little passion (and SO MUCH plastic), I primairily linger 'to fight factual injustice'.

Was over an aquaintence's house last night; he just chopped the top on a '41 Plymouth 2-dr sedan be bought. Even with no fenders, no grille/front fascia, no brightwork, no interior, it was still infinitely more interesting than -say- the 25th variation-on-a-theme '09 mercedes whatchamacallalphanumeric. The rear seat back was hinged at the top, and the lower seat cushions (split) folded up behind the seatback, to open up cargo space on the floor. And you thought flip/fold seats were something recent.

It's all been done before, and always much more interestingly so.

[SAmadei]

1989 Pontiac Stinger

- Take the Chevy/GEO Tracker and rebody it to look like the Stinger concept. While different enough from the Chevy/GEO version, it could have added a youthful, fun and adventurous vehicle to Pontiac's lineup while not totally being too "trucky".

You forgot the Salsa. Very similar to the Stinger, but slightly more conventional. I remember seeing this at NYIAS about '94... it looked alot better in Orange and later, light green.

http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/1085114-1.html

Washable interior, "active lifestyle", beat the Honda Element by a decade... but looks alot better.

Oh, I'd never buy one... but that's only because its just slighty larger than my sneakers.

[Camino LS6]

Don't forget the concept G6 when thinking about what "could have been".

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

The RAGEOUS was always my favorite.

[Oracle of Delphi]

How could you forget the 1998 Pontiac Montana Thunder?

[ocnblu]

Ew, you mean Thunder off Turd Point...right?