Why GM must win the urban war

[turbo200]

we talk about cars like the malibu and CTS as heralding new visions for car design at GM. but mass market cars are more than that. you've got the compact segment, literally an empty house for the buying public at large when it comes to GM. you've got the midsize segment, oh wow looky here, GM's been producing a floundering ugly duckling [or massively conservative ten years ago] version of some badge they used to sell in the glory days, called Malibu. Well, that'll teach 'em, let's buy a dang ol Malibu that used to permeate the rental fleets en masse, but now it's better, that'll show the neighbors---fictional American male.

CTS is great, it's wonderful, but it's not a mass market car, it's not a car for everyone. if you want to change perception, you have to wait for GM to come up with an up to date and completelineup of mass market CARS--not trucks--with killer style and quality that resounds with the American public. the equinox and camaro is a good starting point.

mass market is not one car [malibu], and we certainly won't change perceptions with a model name that used to be considered junk. we'll have to wait and endure.....but GM must come up with ever better product

Edited December 31, 2008 by turbo200

[Robert Hall]

this is the kind of exaggeration that I'm referring to that clouds the judgement of people who are reading this. Is it common knowledge that Nissan made 'horrible' cars in the '90's, and how definable is 'horrible'?

so this is over your head, because you and some others have a propensity for twisting facts and dis-acknowledging history in order to better serve your points.

As far as Nissan in the '90s, that's probably more opinion than reality.. I don't recall anything majorly negative in the magazines about '90s Nissans, and anecdoteally, I've known several people that put 150k or more on '90s Nissans---a couple Maximas, a Sentra, a pickup, a Pathfinder, and a first gen Altima..they seemed happy with their cars.

[A Horse With No Name]

The Astra has, in my opinion, the best, the most solid and high quality interior of the small cars. It felt and looked better in many ways even opposed the the interior in my MK V Golf although the next Golf's interior promises to be better because VW cheaped out a bit on the V's.

For the Golf VI, I've heard they made it more profitable to build by simplifying production over the V. Also, I do believe I read somewhere that the way the doors on the Golf V's were made added something like four hours to building the car. I'm not for sure, so bear with me.

Darn Phaeton project starving their mainlines of development money I suppose, and not making the overall interior quality to be less special than the previous MK IV interior's styling and quality was the best way to get some extra money for that daft but gorgeous German luxury sedan that I am personally a fan of.

I love VW (obviosuly) but I agree on the feel of the Spec V and the Astra. I don't like the styling on the current or prev. Spec V, but it does feel well built.

With the Astra, GM walked through the front door and did the right thing and still got blasted for it.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

And RE: the VW's being "too complicated to be reliable" bull$h!. I agree 100%. Last week GMI posted an article by a California wack-o (Hope Croc is reading this) that stated she would never buy a domestic and that she owns a new Beetle that has quality problems because it is "over engineered in a manner to which only the Germans could take it."

I couldn't agree more....

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

As far as Nissan in the '90s, that's probably more opinion than reality.. I don't recall anything majorly negative in the magazines about '90s Nissans, and anecdoteally, I've known several people that put 150k or more on '90s Nissans---a couple Maximas, a Sentra, a pickup, a Pathfinder, and a first gen Altima..they seemed happy with their cars.

I would agree...Kinda like their 90's lineup better.

Other than the 370Z and the GTR, am just personally not in love with Nissan Styling.

Plus the Maxima is over rated...a front wheel drive wanna be at the price of a very gently used 3 series BMW or new G8 GT? I know a lot of people would rather have new, but given X amount to spend, which would you choose...Maxima or 3 Series...

Chris

[Z-06]

With the Astra, GM walked through the front door and did the right thing and still got blasted for it.

Come to think of it every vehicle bar the Sky which GM gave Saturn as part of their "turnaround" plan seemed like a half-hearted effort.

Aura - good car, but underwhelmed and plagued with little quality problems and guess what rags picked those tiny ones and burned the vehicle down, these problems virtually disappeared in the Malibu.

Vue miles ahead of the old one and better than the competition, but botched and heavy, again rags picked it which lost performance and fuel economy perceptions for the Vue.

Outlook - why did they need this vehicle? Those $$$ would have served better for other lambdas.

Astra - great vehicle, marred by anemic engine and 4-speed with some design overlooks. With Astra GM was in a double mind. They were thinking whether to force it as a premium compact or a step above cobalt? In the end neither is happening.

Adding to these glitches was the marketing campaign for each of these vehicle, which was/is terrible. Saturn with few vehicles, could have easily penetrated the city market by setting small shops, but marketing wallowed its growth. It is sad to see Astra despite being light years ahead of the plastic box Ion has barely managed to sell 25% annually compared to the plastic-fantastic dead sister.

It just felt like GM was being a parent paying daily allowance to a whining stepchild who they wanted to turn 18 and leave the home for good.

As a matter of fact barring trucks, Volt and possibly CTS, GM still is in double minds in every car and every strategy. Someone needs to tell GM to poop or get off the pot. Just make proactive decision and move on. The reactiveness is causing GM more harm than good.

[hyperv6]

To quote one of Americas Great Idiots.

The Larger the crowd the lower the collective IQ.

DLR could not have made a greater statment of the collective population of the United States. There is less wisdom and common sense anymore in this country. We are raising generation after generation of idiots.

People today on a great scale have no clue how Goverment works, buisness works, or much else. They often can't tell you who represents them in Congress but they complain about Washington.

They complain about companies ripping them off but have no clue on how they do buisness.

They complain about Detroit and how bad the cars are but often the last American car they owned was a Celeberty in 1985. But they can tell you who is winning American Idol.

With the gain of the internet and all the information we have at hand it is sad so much of the available information is inaccurate or just flat lies. To many people in the struggle for power and corperate market share put out false info for the many fish to follow and take hook line and sinker.

The propaganda today is just a way of doing buisness. The press is not impartial as we see with papers like the Toronto Star. Networks come up with the 60 min type scams to make an automaker look bad but have to rig the test to make it work.

For detroit to make a come back they need not point fingers. They need to get in and play hardball as the many other companies are. This is where the real maketing comes in. Put up or shut up. Call the bluffs on many of the other makers.

GM needs to come in with cars not as goos but better and prove it. Today their cars are as good in many models but that is not enough. They need to trump Toyota and Honda.

As the guy from Ford told us in School. They no longer fool proof cars they need to idiot proof them. That is how they need to market them. Market them so an idiot can't even mistake how good they are.

Stop marketing the truck and SUV's unless you have something new. Take that money and market your new cars and your best cars. IF they are not good enough to maket improve them or kill them off. GM has too many things on their plate and if we lose a few models along the way so be it as the money would be better used on the models that count or will change the company.

We no longer need to worry about who is #1 or market share. We only need to make a profit on each car sold. This is about making money the rest will return if you do that.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

this is the kind of exaggeration that I'm referring to that clouds the judgement of people who are reading this. Is it common knowledge that Nissan made 'horrible' cars in the '90's, and how definable is 'horrible'? People here have certainly implied that GM models have been 'terrible', and loosely left the word and implication without definition understanding that people knew what it meant. But the explanation for why GM has been a failure time and time again in the design of cars has been literally soaked dry from the wet towel of C&G discourse. in short, we've gone over all the reasons why GM has been bad at designing good upto date and modern cars so much that we've beaten the dead horse to a pulp. it's only a few people here who still stick by this line of always giving GM the upper hand. My God, I think GMI was less progressive than us when 'the awakening' began years ago, and now it seems like every member there has gotten the wisdom even as I don't frequent there very much.

Yes... It seems that the media is even having an effect on the most hardcore fans.

How horrible were Nissan cars if they were still living up to the perception that Japanese cars had huge longevity advantages over American cars. That was something accepted as common wisdom, something I heard from multiple encounters with normal people, something written over the pages of editorial items in papers and magazines..........The idea that Nissan made horrible cars comes from a few lines you've read throughout the years written in editorial pieces about Nissan's lackluster exterior design, but it in no way was referring to components, powertrains, or durability of Nissan.

Wrong.

The fact that Nissan made horrible cars was illustrated by their financial situation in the late 90s and early 00s. No one bought their cars because their cars were crap. And their car still are crap, save for a couple of them. The Altima is a decent car, but it's big advantages are 1) It's marketing was/is superb and 2) It's a mid-size japanese car and no doubt rides on the coat tails of the "other two" cars success. The Versa is competent and sells mostly on price. (It's cheaper than even an Aveo) And the Sentra is just now a competent car with the redesign.

Nothing else at Nissan is all that great, and there sales NOW even reflect that as their recent loses reflect the big three more than the japanese powerhouses. The Z car is nice, but built on a sedan platform (That's a big complaint that I've heard owners whine about all along) The last Maxima certainly didn't set the world on fire. The Titan and Armada are epic failures. The Quest an even bigger failure. Even the Frontier, Pathfinder and Xterra have not aged well and the Rogue is says 'cheaply made' like the Sentra.

Yet somehow Nissan maintains this *magical* image that it is one of the hotter automakers. It's all about PR.

This idea that Nissan was horrible was not generally a concept that had become accepted by the American public. they were just an also-ran, running to derivative, and not offering the right sized model or right quality model in the two most important market segments, compact and midsize, Sentra and Altima, relative to the competition, H and T.

And how is that any different from, oh... say... SATURN?

Yet with good products, we see how the companies took vastly different directions both in the media and the eyes of the public.

The perception you have that Nissan was horrible, also is fed by your reviewing the status of the company, the fact that many articles were written about Nissan's almost-demise in the 90's, again due to lackluster designs, not cars that suffered in quality relative to the competition.

What about the horrible quality now?

If a domestic division had "recovered" as well as Nissan and then had the issues that Nissan had, they'd be forced into bankryuptcy by disdainful americans and horrible, biased press. But with Nissan, no one seems to notice outside of the few that don't carry influence.

so this is over your head, because you and some others have a propensity for twisting facts and dis-acknowledging history in order to better serve your points.

You're just as full of $h! as you always were. I deal with how people react and interact with each other. Just because you (arrogantly) perceive things differently from the MAJORITY of people in the industry doesn't mean that you're right. In fact, it means that the discussion is over YOUR head because your assumptions apparently AREN'T founded in reality. Do the research, then if you're right, you'll have the room to talk down to people here. But until then, you're just another asshole with an opinion.

The media and pop culture CONTROL perception... And, as a result, they LARGELY control the fate of the automakers and our purchase decisions. Don't believe me? Then why were the automakers grilled about personal jets in congress? (HINT: Because the Wall Street Journal brought it to Congress' attention) Why was Audi almost ran out of business in the 80s? (HINT: Because the media blew quality concerns way out of proportion) Why did Suzuki spend 10+ years sueing Consumer Reports for falsifying reports on the Sidekick? (HINT: Because what THE MEDIA says MATTERS a whole lot!)

In fact, if my knowledge of perception and marketing is so wrong, then why have marketing and different divisions in the first place?!? If image and "word of mouth"/opinion don't matter in the grand scheme of things, then what's the point?

Like it or not, your "educated" way of seeing the industry DOES NOT jive and isn't worth a damn to the average consumer. They see an article in the paper about Detroit and they form (or most likely CONFIRM) a negative opinion. therefore they will not buy a domestic. Nissan however, because of our cultures acceptance and promotion of other cultures, ESPECIALLY the japanese culture (because we believe they are *so damn advanced* in everything) can "brush off" a bad image and live to fight another day.

Edited January 1, 2009 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

we talk about cars like the malibu and CTS as heralding new visions for car design at GM. but mass market cars are more than that. you've got the compact segment, literally an empty house for the buying public at large when it comes to GM. you've got the midsize segment, oh wow looky here, GM's been producing a floundering ugly duckling [or massively conservative ten years ago] version of some badge they used to sell in the glory days, called Malibu. Well, that'll teach 'em, let's buy a dang ol Malibu that used to permeate the rental fleets en masse, but now it's better, that'll show the neighbors---fictional American male.

CTS is great, it's wonderful, but it's not a mass market car, it's not a car for everyone. if you want to change perception, you have to wait for GM to come up with an up to date and completelineup of mass market CARS--not trucks--with killer style and quality that resounds with the American public. the equinox and camaro is a good starting point.

mass market is not one car [malibu], and we certainly won't change perceptions with a model name that used to be considered junk. we'll have to wait and endure.....but GM must come up with ever better product

And no one has EVER disputed that here.

[turbo200]

Yes... It seems that the media is even having an effect on the most hardcore fans.

Wrong.

The fact that Nissan made horrible cars was illustrated by their financial situation in the late 90s and early 00s. No one bought their cars because their cars were crap. And their car still are crap, save for a couple of them. The Altima is a decent car, but it's big advantages are 1) It's marketing was/is superb and 2) It's a mid-size japanese car and no doubt rides on the coat tails of the "other two" cars success. The Versa is competent and sells mostly on price. (It's cheaper than even an Aveo) And the Sentra is just now a competent car with the redesign.

Nothing else at Nissan is all that great, and there sales NOW even reflect that as their recent loses reflect the big three more than the japanese powerhouses. The Z car is nice, but built on a sedan platform (That's a big complaint that I've heard owners whine about all along) The last Maxima certainly didn't set the world on fire. The Titan and Armada are epic failures. The Quest an even bigger failure. Even the Frontier, Pathfinder and Xterra have not aged well and the Rogue is says 'cheaply made' like the Sentra.

Yet somehow Nissan maintains this *magical* image that it is one of the hotter automakers. It's all about PR.

And I commented that your vision of how Nissan did was funded in your understanding that Nissan almost failed in the '90's, lost all thier money. Most people don't know about that, most people outside car enthusiasts, who actually care about how the businesses run, a very small portion of the public, knew about this situation.

With the crap issue you're yet again proving me right. exaggerating and generalizing left and right, as if your singular opinion that everything is 'crap' will just be met with complete acceptance. we can get into semantics about which car does this better and what issues plague them, but the bottom line is Nissan gets that cars can't be bland-arific concepts. they get that the ideas behind the car design is what motivates car buyers and buyers either flock to those ideas or don't. they get that they need to make cars desirable inside and out, a complete experience. more than i can say for most of GM cars.

And how is that any different from, oh... say... SATURN?

Yet with good products, we see how the companies took vastly different directions both in the media and the eyes of the public.

what are we talking about here, the media you've created in your mind? from what I recall, Astra, the least advertised of the new lineup, kicked some ass in comparison tests, especially one in C&D, that never would have happend for Cobalt. Aura won North American Car of the year. Outlook was highly rated. Vue has been called heavy, but on the other hand Edmunds remarked it was great to drive and desirable to own.

Your first question is how is Nissan a different situation from Saturn? it's so different I don't know where to begin. Nissan was already accepted for being a full scale maker of cars, Saturn had a reputation for making plastic small cars that were weird looking and cheap. This had nothing to do with media and everything to do with word of mouth, yes that wonderful image, and it's always 100% backed up by the product. the product speaks for itself.

HINT: [as you so loveingly do when you want to show an idea that escapes everyone else but you]: there have been plenty of diatribes written about Nissan's lack of materials quality, but when it comes to performance and hardware, there's been nothing to complain about beause they do thier homework. and design is subjective, but Nissan is trying to make something that looks attractive and is worth its price.

What about the horrible quality now?

If a domestic division had "recovered" as well as Nissan and then had the issues that Nissan had, they'd be forced into bankryuptcy by disdainful americans and horrible, biased press. But with Nissan, no one seems to notice outside of the few that don't carry influence.

]besides the Titan what are you referring to? bad plastics quality? that's not the same as overall quality. that's quality in presentation, quality in durability and reliability is what I was referring to, Nissan has not had a negative perception in those fields from what I've read. Again, Nissan "recovered from being unprofitable, not from making poor quality cars. that the cars were generally unappealing to own is another issue, and one that was turned around in order to make them profitable

You're just as full of $h! as you always were. I deal with how people react and interact with each other. Just because you (arrogantly) perceive things differently from the MAJORITY of people in the industry doesn't mean that you're right. In fact, it means that the discussion is over YOUR head because your assumptions apparently AREN'T founded in reality. Do the research, then if you're right, you'll have the room to talk down to people here. But until then, you're just another asshole with an opinion.

The media and pop culture CONTROL perception... And, as a result, they LARGELY control the fate of the automakers and our purchase decisions. Don't believe me? Then why were the automakers grilled about personal jets in congress? (HINT: Because the Wall Street Journal brought it to Congress' attention) Why was Audi almost ran out of business in the 80s? (HINT: Because the media blew quality concerns way out of proportion) Why did Suzuki spend 10+ years sueing Consumer Reports for falsifying reports on the Sidekick? (HINT: Because what THE MEDIA says MATTERS a whole lot!)

In fact, if my knowledge of perception and marketing is so wrong, then why have marketing and different divisions in the first place?!? If image and "word of mouth"/opinion don't matter in the grand scheme of things, then what's the point?

Like it or not, your "educated" way of seeing the industry DOES NOT jive and isn't worth a damn to the average consumer. They see an article in the paper about Detroit and they form (or most likely CONFIRM) a negative opinion. therefore they will not buy a domestic. Nissan however, because of our cultures acceptance and promotion of other cultures, ESPECIALLY the japanese culture (because we believe they are *so damn advanced* in everything) can "brush off" a bad image and live to fight another day.

I never said marketing and image count for nothing. I said that product affects this in the first place. I said that GM needs to make their lineup desirable. the marketing, whether it follows later or not, will not make as huge of a dent when all the cars are executed to the level of Camaro.

HINT: don't call people names it just cheapens your point.

Edited January 1, 2009 by turbo200

[gmcbob]

I would agree...Kinda like their 90's lineup better.

Other than the 370Z and the GTR, am just personally not in love with Nissan Styling.

Plus the Maxima is over rated...a front wheel drive wanna be at the price of a very gently used 3 series BMW or new G8 GT? I know a lot of people would rather have new, but given X amount to spend, which would you choose...Maxima or 3 Series...

Chris

And what's amazing (from a purely "practical" standpoint) is how many people would choose the Maxima over the G8, without even looking at or driving the two cars. Not that spending $32000 on a vehicle is all that "practical" from a financial standpoint, but you all know what I'm driving at here. The G8, for the money, is more car in a lot of ways. Plus the new Maxima looks like a gigantic catfish with no whiskers - that new front end is just plain stupid looking.

Although I do think not having a navigation system or blue tooth in the G8 kind of sucks - especially for a car that you're spending over $30k on. I never really thought I'd dig those features as much as I do in our G35, but once you've used them, you're kind of hooked (or at least I was). GM should have really considered this on that car. On that note, I could see someone choosing the Maxima over a G8.

Of course, the real problem for GM and PBG dealers isn't what NAV screens or technological features the G8 lacks compared to the Maxima or 3 Series. It's actually getting people who are willing to spend $30k + on a car like a Maxima or 3 Series to even REALIZE that Pontiac makes a car called the G8! Other than total die hard car fans, the G8 is probably one of the most elusive cars out there. I'd be willing to bet that other than a few of my IT friends and a couple of my more well read motor head friends, that most of the people I know who would buy a mid size, nice car, have absolutely NO CLUE what a G8 is. But they'd instantly know what a Maxima or a BMW 3 was.

It will always come back around to GM becoming a truck company in recent years. Shaking that image will be very, very hard.

[CARBIZ]

Not sure about whether the G8 has bluetooth or a nav system (considering bluetooth is available on virtually all Chevys this year, I don't know how the G8 could have been missed), but as I've tirelessly mentioned before, OnStar is far more convenient than a nav system (you can get course changes without having to stop the car and put it in park!!!!!) and is standard on nearly all GM's now. Guess what, you can play with turn by turn for a year without throwing $2,000 (or more) out the window, which is what most companies charge or 'package up' for the thrill of a nav system.

As to the Nissan (or Datsun, as I lovingly refer to them as), no company represents the outrageous mythology of Japan Inc more than Datsun. From the very glory days start of the company as an adjunct to the Japanese military creating them to build tanks and trucks in Manchuria using slave Chinese labor, to the underpowered, rusting crap they built in the '80s, those 'in the know' love to beat up Chrysler for the K-car and GM for the Chevette, but I drove the glorious Datsun 210 and can attest to what a total, vinyl coated, under powered, plasticky crapmobile it truly was. I never once hear that vehicle referred to in one of C&D's or CR's or MT's, or whomever's gush-fest over the latest Nissan offering.

There may only be one of two ways that GM is going to beat this wrap, and both pretty much involve a world war. Either we see a Depression that makes the Dirty Thirties look like a Church picnic, or maybe Israel and Iran will deliver us a nuclear New Year that will bring Armageddon down on our heads, because in no other way do I see the past 40 years of fat, lazy and stupid mentality being eradicated.

And that is my New Year's message: Nihilism!!!!

[CARBIZ]

Not sure about whether the G8 has bluetooth or a nav system (considering bluetooth is available on virtually all Chevys this year, I don't know how the G8 could have been missed), but as I've tirelessly mentioned before, OnStar is far more convenient than a nav system (you can get course changes without having to stop the car and put it in park!!!!!) and is standard on nearly all GM's now. Guess what, you can play with turn by turn for a year without throwing $2,000 (or more) out the window, which is what most companies charge or 'package up' for the thrill of a nav system.

As to the Nissan (or Datsun, as I lovingly refer to them as), no company represents the outrageous mythology of Japan Inc more than Datsun. From the very glory days start of the company as an adjunct to the Japanese military creating them to build tanks and trucks in Manchuria using slave Chinese labor, to the underpowered, rusting crap they built in the '80s, those 'in the know' love to beat up Chrysler for the K-car and GM for the Chevette, but I drove the glorious Datsun 210 and can attest to what a total, vinyl coated, under powered, plasticky crapmobile it truly was. I never once hear that vehicle referred to in one of C&D's or CR's or MT's, or whomever's gush-fest over the latest Nissan offering.

There may only be one of two ways that GM is going to beat this wrap, and both pretty much involve a world war. Either we see a Depression that makes the Dirty Thirties look like a Church picnic, or maybe Israel and Iran will deliver us a nuclear New Year that will bring Armageddon down on our heads, because in no other way do I see the past 40 years of fat, lazy and stupid mentality being eradicated.

And that is my New Year's message: Nihilism!!!!

[regfootball]

Here's your daily laugh: I spoke with a 70 year old retired school teacher today. She has a '98 Cavalier that is running perfectly. She was a service customer. She started yakking about all the bad news about GM/Ford and then made the declaration that her next car will be an import because she doesn't think the UAW guys deserve the pay they are getting. She said her nephew works at the St. Thomas Ford plant and his cheque was bigger than hers ( I guess this was 10 or 15 years ago) and she has a degree while he only turns a wrench.

I was simply aghast. Firstly, because here is one over-paid, pensioned out union employee slinging mud against other 'over-paid' union employees, but secondly because she feels it is perfectly reasonable to throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak.

I carefully chose my words as I asked her if it were reasonable for GM to rip up their contracts with the UAW and throw the million or so pensioners out on the street. Well, at least this old bag said she wouldn't go 'that far,' but they should get a 'comeupance.' Really, I pressed, what if the government came to you and said 'we are broke (which they f'ing well are!) and, therefore, we are going to slash your gold-plated pension? Oh, they can't do that, she cried, because we are fully funded. Yeah, but how did those funds get their 20, 30 years ago? I should point out that teachers in Ontario make $65k and up - and let's not get into the 12+ weeks holidays a year they get. And don't get me started on the value of the degrees that many of the teachers hold. Full disclosure: I know far too many teachers as it is, and I despair at our future.

I would be loathe to defend the UAW, but I find it really outrageous when a supposedly educated woman starts mouthing off about something she clearly knows nothing about.

If she is any indication, then as a nation(s) and as a people, we are doomed.

the school year needs to be changed. get rid of the summer vacay. schools should be set up in quarters and there is no reason why we shouldn't utilize the summer in some way for education as well.

[regfootball]

have you driven any of the saturns?

aura-fun to drive. very good car.

vue- test drive any vue and then drive a rice model like a forester etc. you won't buy the competition.

outlook- along with the acadia was GM's first crossover and is among the best family haulers. more useful than the cargo space challenged cx-9 (could never use it for a family trip) or overpriced mdx

astra-quite peppy with a manual actually and class leading handling. if you tested one you'd find out it feels upscale.

sky- affordable 260hp roadster? yeah chevy has that right now.

there was incompleteness to which saturn has developed each vehicle, but honestly that occurs with all manufacturers and models.

even though saturn appears fairly dead now, had the marketing been correct and a few details been done better on each of these vehicles, saturn would probably be thriving.

one thing the auto collapse may do is force GM to throw all the resources at chevy (it's least esteemed brand, go figure, lets throw our rebuilding efforts at the brand the public thinks is the biggest loser, the biggest hole to unbury from). and hopefully it focuses buick and pontiac. funny though did pontiac need focus as much as 8-9 year ago when they were still pushing half a million units?

Come to think of it every vehicle bar the Sky which GM gave Saturn as part of their "turnaround" plan seemed like a half-hearted effort.

Aura - good car, but underwhelmed and plagued with little quality problems and guess what rags picked those tiny ones and burned the vehicle down, these problems virtually disappeared in the Malibu.

Vue miles ahead of the old one and better than the competition, but botched and heavy, again rags picked it which lost performance and fuel economy perceptions for the Vue.

Outlook - why did they need this vehicle? Those $$$ would have served better for other lambdas.

Astra - great vehicle, marred by anemic engine and 4-speed with some design overlooks. With Astra GM was in a double mind. They were thinking whether to force it as a premium compact or a step above cobalt? In the end neither is happening.

Adding to these glitches was the marketing campaign for each of these vehicle, which was/is terrible. Saturn with few vehicles, could have easily penetrated the city market by setting small shops, but marketing wallowed its growth. It is sad to see Astra despite being light years ahead of the plastic box Ion has barely managed to sell 25% annually compared to the plastic-fantastic dead sister.

It just felt like GM was being a parent paying daily allowance to a whining stepchild who they wanted to turn 18 and leave the home for good.

As a matter of fact barring trucks, Volt and possibly CTS, GM still is in double minds in every car and every strategy. Someone needs to tell GM to poop or get off the pot. Just make proactive decision and move on. The reactiveness is causing GM more harm than good.

[regfootball]

Not sure about whether the G8 has bluetooth or a nav system (considering bluetooth is available on virtually all Chevys this year, I don't know how the G8 could have been missed), but as I've tirelessly mentioned before, OnStar is far more convenient than a nav system (you can get course changes without having to stop the car and put it in park!!!!!) and is standard on nearly all GM's now. Guess what, you can play with turn by turn for a year without throwing $2,000 (or more) out the window, which is what most companies charge or 'package up' for the thrill of a nav system.

As to the Nissan (or Datsun, as I lovingly refer to them as), no company represents the outrageous mythology of Japan Inc more than Datsun. From the very glory days start of the company as an adjunct to the Japanese military creating them to build tanks and trucks in Manchuria using slave Chinese labor, to the underpowered, rusting crap they built in the '80s, those 'in the know' love to beat up Chrysler for the K-car and GM for the Chevette, but I drove the glorious Datsun 210 and can attest to what a total, vinyl coated, under powered, plasticky crapmobile it truly was. I never once hear that vehicle referred to in one of C&D's or CR's or MT's, or whomever's gush-fest over the latest Nissan offering.

There may only be one of two ways that GM is going to beat this wrap, and both pretty much involve a world war. Either we see a Depression that makes the Dirty Thirties look like a Church picnic, or maybe Israel and Iran will deliver us a nuclear New Year that will bring Armageddon down on our heads, because in no other way do I see the past 40 years of fat, lazy and stupid mentality being eradicated.

And that is my New Year's message: Nihilism!!!!

GM should bite the bullet and get standard NAV screens in every car for 2010. then, build the value of on star by integrating the on star turn by turn with the standard NAV screen. now THAT would be innovation and leveraging the existing service. make the screen standard with the on star assistance a small fee based deal. give it away for free for a bit and make sales off new added on star features that correspond with the screens. add entertainment and travel services and internet to on star. then it becomes a profit center.

[hyperv6]

Fbodfather Scott Settlemire has pointed out while GM spends tons of money on some part fo a car they tend to neglect other things.

He pointed out on the 4 Gen F body GM put a lot of money into suspension and drivetrain but little into the interior and other things that ended up as well know problem areas. Yess they had a car that could match a Porsche on the track but they had owners with power windows that failed.

Also It has been pointed out Chevy never had moeny left over to market the car as they should have. Even Ford left a little for the Mustang.

If Gm could kill off half the model they make today and keep with the best they have now and coming. Then they could afford to cover all the details and not have to cheap out in areas that come back to bite them.

Saturn is a case study of the problems GM has had. They sell the some fine cars but those outside GM know so little about them. Also they have had a few models like a large SUV that really should have been a Chevy not a Saturn They corrected that but still no marketing? But then again no money for Marketing.

GM needs cuts and they need to get trhe word out on their vehicles.

People are shocked when I come out of work and my HHR SS is running. They are even more shocked to know remote start was standard. Then I tell them it even starts the rear window de froster if it is cold enough.

Why go through the mostions on adding these great features that no one knows of unless they go into a showroom or visit the web site. The sdad fact people for the most have not considered GM enough to even check them out.

GM needs to get these cars and features in the face of the public. IF you can sell them then word of mouth will take off if the vehicle is good.

Better to sell half the models and market them well vs offering twice as many and not marketing them well if at all.

[gmcbob]

I've used the turn by turn in my 2008 Vue once, and I actually thought it was pretty cool. But IMO, I think the NAV screen is a little bit cooler. I like regfootball's idea of having a screen and the turn by turn together.

[hyperv6]

I've used the turn by turn in my 2008 Vue once, and I actually thought it was pretty cool. But IMO, I think the NAV screen is a little bit cooler. I like regfootball's idea of having a screen and the turn by turn together.

Nav screens are on the way out as on board hard drives and internet is on the way in. It will take care of all the needs that a driver can have. Nav, Weather radar. Music and Movie down load information on where to stay or eat ETC.

See if GM can package a Internet Link that is affordable to put in like On Star across all models.

I have no use for NAV as I read road signs. But I would love to have weather radar on my cross country trips. When I am hitting snow in WV and going north I would like to know more of what I am running into when the roads go to hell.

I know every Exit on just about every interstate but the weather is always changing. Unless you in So Cal.

Also a hard drive with all my music would be great. Better than XM as there would be no Bruce Springsteen messing up my commute.

If GM wants to lead they need to leap ahead vs just catching up with NAV screens.

Or better yet turn On Star into a internet cell phone service that can be used at home or on the road. If you can do this all on a I Phone why can't you do it in your car with a removeable intergrated I Phone or something similar like a Blackberry?

It would beat the hell out of having a self parking car you talk to.

The youngrt kids today and coming up tech savy that a NAV screen is not going to be enough in a couple years. Time to more forward and meet the future.

Information is power and people know that now.

Besides we can spam the hell out of the Toyotas with GM advertising once they get it.

Edited January 1, 2009 by hyperv6

[Robert Hall]

The youngrt kids today and coming up tech savy that a NAV screen is not going to be enough in a couple years. Time to more forward and meet the future.

I'd like a NAV screen that uses Google maps... would be nice to be able to key in the from and to and get a Google map, or Google street view, etc on the display.

If I'm driving to a restaurant I'm unfamiliar with, I print out a Google map before leaving, would be nice to be able to do it in the car.

[CARBIZ]

Fbodfather Scott Settlemire has pointed out while GM spends tons of money on some part fo a car they tend to neglect other things.

He pointed out on the 4 Gen F body GM put a lot of money into suspension and drivetrain but little into the interior and other things that ended up as well know problem areas. Yess they had a car that could match a Porsche on the track but they had owners with power windows that failed.

Also It has been pointed out Chevy never had moeny left over to market the car as they should have. Even Ford left a little for the Mustang.

If Gm could kill off half the model they make today and keep with the best they have now and coming. Then they could afford to cover all the details and not have to cheap out in areas that come back to bite them.

Saturn is a case study of the problems GM has had. They sell the some fine cars but those outside GM know so little about them. Also they have had a few models like a large SUV that really should have been a Chevy not a Saturn They corrected that but still no marketing? But then again no money for Marketing.

GM needs cuts and they need to get trhe word out on their vehicles.

People are shocked when I come out of work and my HHR SS is running. They are even more shocked to know remote start was standard. Then I tell them it even starts the rear window de froster if it is cold enough.

Why go through the mostions on adding these great features that no one knows of unless they go into a showroom or visit the web site. The sdad fact people for the most have not considered GM enough to even check them out.

GM needs to get these cars and features in the face of the public. IF you can sell them then word of mouth will take off if the vehicle is good.

Better to sell half the models and market them well vs offering twice as many and not marketing them well if at all.

Excellent post. GM has sweated the details in places where it counts - where owners appreciate them: auto headlights, retained accessory power, speed compensated volume on radios, RDS, turn signals that turn themselves off, starter lockouts on clutchest - years before anyone else. However, the challenge is to get people to try them, and that is hard to do in a 10 minute 'walk around' with a customer. Even with OnStar - it is lightyears ahead of what anyone else offers, but you have to USE it ot appreciate it.

A Nav screen in a rental is sooo much flashier, I guess. So, I guess the moral of the story is GM needs to f@#k off the important things and spend more $$$ on door handles and soft dashboards to win over the jaded press.

Yeah, that's what I call progress.

Maybe next time I see a $40k Infinity in my underground garage with his headlights off, I'll just ram him to prove how f'ing stupid he is.............if he'd bought a '91 Lumina, he wouldn't have to remember to turn them on.

[Robert Hall]

Maybe next time I see a $40k Infinity in my underground garage with his headlights off, I'll just ram him to prove how f'ing stupid he is.............if he'd bought a '91 Lumina, he wouldn't have to remember to turn them on.

Maybe they have the auto lights turned off... cars I've had with automatic lights have an on/ off setting.

[The O.C.]

I agree...

I don't think it's so much about selling cars in urban areas as it is about conquering the negative image in the eyes of the urbanites that set the trends. (My education supports this in a big way, it is blatantly obvious to me. maybe not so much to GM)

GM has, incredibly, taken such a close-minded approach to these influential urban centers that it borders on lunacy.

Recalling my experience working for GM back in the late 80's to late '90's........working for Buick as a District Manager in San Francisco, then Los Angeles (a lot of my comments also apply to my time spent in Philadelphia as well....an east coast major urban center).......

.....it was amazing how all aspects of "Buick"....it's regional employees, it's dealerships, it's overall markets in CA (and eastern PA) were all treated as bastard step-children when it came to advertising and marketing dollars, regional support, and overall focus and support from the company.

Buick's position was......to spend the vast majority of their money and resources in the midwest and Florida (old people) because that's where they sold cars. So why would they EVER consider expending resources to the import-dominated coasts?

Well.....I guess here 20 years later......we now know the answer......

[Z-06]

have you driven any of the saturns?

aura-fun to drive. very good car.

vue- test drive any vue and then drive a rice model like a forester etc. you won't buy the competition.

outlook- along with the acadia was GM's first crossover and is among the best family haulers. more useful than the cargo space challenged cx-9 (could never use it for a family trip) or overpriced mdx

astra-quite peppy with a manual actually and class leading handling. if you tested one you'd find out it feels upscale.

sky- affordable 260hp roadster? yeah chevy has that right now.

there was incompleteness to which saturn has developed each vehicle, but honestly that occurs with all manufacturers and models.

even though saturn appears fairly dead now, had the marketing been correct and a few details been done better on each of these vehicles, saturn would probably be thriving.

one thing the auto collapse may do is force GM to throw all the resources at chevy (it's least esteemed brand, go figure, lets throw our rebuilding efforts at the brand the public thinks is the biggest loser, the biggest hole to unbury from). and hopefully it focuses buick and pontiac. funny though did pontiac need focus as much as 8-9 year ago when they were still pushing half a million units?

Reread my post, what I am stating is GM has not put complete effort in Saturn to a point that the flaws are glaringly obvious. Saturn vehicles are much better than before and yes I have driven all of them save the barn Outlook. However, none of them was ground breaking enough to justify the up levelness GM was trying to portray Saturn. I am praising the Sky just as you are. But what about those power window switches, or get out and pull up the roof, or those bezels which glare in your eyes with top down or the non existent trunk or portly weight? Those anamolies may be small for GM fans but to convince import transplants you need something more.

Yes incompleteness does occur, but not to a point where there is nothing to cover your good points (read lack of marketing). When those shortcomings go MIA in the next vehicle, (Aura to Malibu) why would even a GM fan get a Saturn? GM could have spent that money from Aura wisely on Malibu to make it even better. Vue will be irrelevant once the Equinox hits the dealerships. Vue 2-mode Hybrid with ONLY FWD? Is that a small mistake? It is a great ride, but come on, budget SUV people are looking for fuel sippers not something which gives 1mpg better than its much bigger brother while hauling significantly less stuff. Again, Equinox will eradicate that fuel economy stigma.

Astra is a great handler, but as I said, GM bummed up for not knowing how to position that car. When the crosstown German rival (VW) was offering a more powerful car at same price and more standard features, who would want the Saturn. No armrest, neither enough cup holders (one is not enough), lack of plug in connectivity, which exists in cheaper Cobalt - yes Americans need these features. It is not fair for GM to let a customer know sorry pal you cannot have those features, as they are irrelevant. Well the customer comes back and says sorry pal you cannot have my money as your product is irrelevant.

Outlook took the development dollars off the other lambdas; people would argue that Saturn does not have "dealer power" as the reason of Outlook lagging other three. But if Saturn is so spectacular about their service – like many here and in GM like to believe, then why is it languishing in the bottom of the heap for customer retention?

The mistake GM made is to put Saturn a step above without any signals for the customer. Again, it was what GM wanted, not Saturn's customers. If GM would have improved the quality and bumped the price a little, and not had Outlook or the Aura they could have spent development dollars elsewhere. Astra should have come with better features and more options - including powertrain, while keeping Sky, Ion should have been replaced with Astra sedan. Then Saturn would have possibly seen the turnaround. Personally, I think Corsa should have been in Saturn stable while the platform was being developed. With Fiesta coming out, Fit in and other products garnering reviews, GM will be again playing the reactive game.

Ironic was Jill Ladziak calling Aura the sport sedan and when reporters asked where is the manual transmission she said it does not have one but you can use the manumatic mode – yeah right. What Saturn execs were hoping is that the customer would come to the salesman and say voila, I did not expect that from Saturn and buy. Well the customer did say voila, but when they heard the price, they also said voila not worth for a Saturn. Baby steps are important not a giant stride while not supporting the stride by a strong marketing campaign, failure will happen.

At release of Aura Lutz said if this product blitz does not save Saturn, then I am running out of ideas. The quote now looks prophetic. May be he was placating Saturn execs while waiting for the inevitable, or may be it is a mere coincidence.

Edited January 1, 2009 by smallchevy

[The O.C.]

I like regfootball's idea of having a screen and the turn by turn together.

......that is coming soon.....according to the local OnStar representative that visited our dealership........

[hyperv6]

Heard a good one today. One ot he wifes co workers a eductated person tried to claim since all the Detroit Automakers are bankrupt that the Detroit Auto show was canceled and that they were going to move it out of Detroit.

This is the kind of false BS info that Gm has to fight against. These people think they have it covered and have no idea. This is just about the autoshow can you imagine this person having anything good to say about the automakers themselves?

Not sure what kind of car they drive but I betting it is not American.

[vt_hokie]

It is easy for someone to get a bad reputation but it is so much harder to regain the respect.

GM is like a ex convict. He may have served his time and may be a really good guy now with a freshly earned PHD. But the neighbors still wisper he is the guy that held up the bank 20 years ago.

Toyota is like Martha Stewart. Yes she may have been convicted of a feloney but to many in the public they feel it was not a real crime because there was no Gun. Toyota makes a mistake or have a problem they get a pass because they are not precived as evil.

GM is like the old Bank robber and has to go out and show and prove how they is no longer the thug and is prepared to give back. GM took a lot of money form people with poor quality cars over the years and robbed a lot of bank accounts when the owners need to repair them. That is trust that is going to be hard to earned.

GM did the right thing and admitted they made crap but they need to follow through with this and market the hell out of what they are doing right today.

GM won me as a customer, when I likely would have bought an import, by creating Saturn and adopting a better management and labor system in Spring Hill. I remember reading Consumer Reports back in the 80's and early 90's, when aside from maybe the Ford Crown Vic/Mercury Grand Marquis, all the domestic cars were getting much worse than average reliability ratings while the Japanese were consistently above average. Then along comes Saturn, which actually got better or much better than average reliability marks. That's when GM proved it could change for the better.

Then GM lost me as a customer when they dismantled everything different about Saturn, and turned it into another crappy standard GM division. Not surprisingly, Saturn's reliability reputation went to s**t.

[hyperv6]

GM won me as a customer, when I likely would have bought an import, by creating Saturn and adopting a better management and labor system in Spring Hill. I remember reading Consumer Reports back in the 80's and early 90's, when aside from maybe the Ford Crown Vic/Mercury Grand Marquis, all the domestic cars were getting much worse than average reliability ratings while the Japanese were consistently above average. Then along comes Saturn, which actually got better or much better than average reliability marks. That's when GM proved it could change for the better.

Then GM lost me as a customer when they dismantled everything different about Saturn, and turned it into another crappy standard GM division. Not surprisingly, Saturn's reliability reputation went to s**t.

Saturn's got the best car they ever had right now, The dealers still have the same good service and who cares what goes on at Spinghill unless you work there?

The old cars were too few in moderls, they were good but not great models with engines that the Piston Rings would fail on.

Saturn did not get worse but the rest of GM and Ford got better.

To compare the Crown Vic to anything on equal terms you would have to go back nearly 20 years. That car was designed and first sold years ago and little was change over the years. the best to compare it to is say like a 87 Buick Regal as they were designed in a same era.

Todays Aura and Astra are leaps ahead of the past Saturns in all areas and to be honest they are ow getting behind the many other new models coming out so it is time to replace them if Saturn is to stay around.

Years ago I had nothing against Saturn but I would not consider one. Today they have several models I would consider.

[A Horse With No Name]

What we still dance around, years later, is that GM still needs a class leading small car.

The Cobalt is good, but should be better. I am interested to see what GM does with it. Hopefully they keep production in Lordstown, Ohio. It would be horrible for our already trashed economy if this plant were to close.

The Astra has about a 400 day supply right now, and it hasn't done anything in the marketplace. I love it, but I love manual shift cars. 90% of what they will sell will be autotrajic, and the autotrajic just sucks life out of the 1.8liter motor. This car with the Cobalt 2.4 would just be the cat's ass. This car with the 260 h.p. Coblat SS/Skyredline/HHR SS/Pontiac Solstice GXP powertrain would be out of this world, but I'm running down a rabbit trail...

We still need a funky, different small car. There is a several month waiting list for the Smart car, the first gen Scion xB has phenominal resale, and the Beat concept car was really cool. I have no doubt GM can build both a really good conventional small car (even better than the already good Cobalt and Astra) as well as a really funky, cool Gen Y car that will also sell well to the over 50 crowd.

And this is what keeps me coming back to Cheers and Gears and giving me hope in GM.

GM just needs to change some of their product thinking and some of their marketing...and then they can start taking the urban areas back.

Chris

[enzl]

What we still dance around, years later, is that GM still needs a class leading small car.

The Cobalt is good, but should be better. I am interested to see what GM does with it. Hopefully they keep production in Lordstown, Ohio. It would be horrible for our already trashed economy if this plant were to close.

The Astra has about a 400 day supply right now, and it hasn't done anything in the marketplace. I love it, but I love manual shift cars. 90% of what they will sell will be autotrajic, and the autotrajic just sucks life out of the 1.8liter motor. This car with the Cobalt 2.4 would just be the cat's ass. This car with the 260 h.p. Coblat SS/Skyredline/HHR SS/Pontiac Solstice GXP powertrain would be out of this world, but I'm running down a rabbit trail...

We still need a funky, different small car. There is a several month waiting list for the Smart car, the first gen Scion xB has phenominal resale, and the Beat concept car was really cool. I have no doubt GM can build both a really good conventional small car (even better than the already good Cobalt and Astra) as well as a really funky, cool Gen Y car that will also sell well to the over 50 crowd.

And this is what keeps me coming back to Cheers and Gears and giving me hope in GM.

GM just needs to change some of their product thinking and some of their marketing...and then they can start taking the urban areas back.

Chris

The shortage of a real, head turning, class-leading US small car has haunted GM since the Beetle crawled ashore 50+ years ago. GM hasn't quite shook off the notion that small cars are a waste of time...the products they've produced merely reinforced that attitude and perpetuated it.

I just don't think they should bother if they're not going to try and do something different (in a good way). How about putting stop/start and BAS in the Cruze when it arrives? Or the option of a diesel? They've got to try something else--something that makes news, something that matters---and thus makes GM relevant. Other than the loss of the SS versions, who other than Avis would mourn the loss of the Cobalt/G5?

You've got to get people's attention in a crowded mindspace--'just good enough' has been a recipe for disaster.

Edited January 2, 2009 by enzl

[A Horse With No Name]

"Just good enough' has been a recipe for disaster."

I couldn't agree more.

Chris

[Z-06]

"Just good enough' has been a recipe for disaster."

I couldn't agree more.

Chris

Absolutely. I also completely agree with your previous post about small cars. Most of Saturn's vehicles are "almost there but not really there." The job is not completely done - making excuses has not helped GM.

Like enzl said we need one solid, no compromise small car in US from GM with complete engineering efforts in every design aspect. Astra does not fit this bill and neither does any of GM small cars in US market.

[CARBIZ]

Maybe they have the auto lights turned off... cars I've had with automatic lights have an on/ off setting.

For 2009, Infiniti charges $4,000 for the Touring Package on the G37, to get auto on/off headlights, among other goodies. That's 2009. My '91 Caprice had it STANDARD.

As I've said, I'm an urban dweller, and I am sick of driving around underground garages and suddenly come upon some idiot in a $40,000 car that doesn't have automatic headlights. It's dangerous, and these idiots obviously need to be reminded. In 2009, it's just stupid not to have features like auto headlights as standard. But, hey, let the auto press bitch about hard plastics in the '10 Equinox because plastic dashes you can sleep on are soooo much more important to them.

These guys/gals in the auto press are a bunch of idiots. I recently fired off a letter to Jil McIntosh, who writes for the Toyota Star because that hag whined about the Aveo5's rear seat leaving a 19cm hump when folded flat. Oh, the cow took the time to measure the hump, but not the time to figure out that the seats flip a SECOND time, leaving a cavernous rear cargo area that puts the Rio (also written up in the Star that day) to shame.

They are lazy, stupid and biased. It hurts Detroit every time (most) of these idiots turn on their computer.

[turbo200]

" no one will mourn the loss of that car"

really a great way to express the fanfare/adoration of a certain model.....how much it was able to enchant consumer mindspace. agreed totally with enzl on the idea that ss will be the only cobalt to do so, other than that it's a perfectly average car.

so my question is, without having driven it and without knowing how much of a factor that will be in adding desirability quotient, basing it on what we've seen of the design, can we say the Cruze will change the answer to that question? If not, then GM better get to developing a new small car. My answer, is based on the design, no.

[Robert Hall]

What we still dance around, years later, is that GM still needs a class leading small car.

The Cobalt is good, but should be better. I am interested to see what GM does with it. Hopefully they keep production in Lordstown, Ohio. It would be horrible for our already trashed economy if this plant were to close.

The Astra has about a 400 day supply right now, and it hasn't done anything in the marketplace. I love it, but I love manual shift cars. 90% of what they will sell will be autotrajic, and the autotrajic just sucks life out of the 1.8liter motor. This car with the Cobalt 2.4 would just be the cat's ass. This car with the 260 h.p. Coblat SS/Skyredline/HHR SS/Pontiac Solstice GXP powertrain would be out of this world, but I'm running down a rabbit trail...

We still need a funky, different small car. There is a several month waiting list for the Smart car, the first gen Scion xB has phenominal resale, and the Beat concept car was really cool. I have no doubt GM can build both a really good conventional small car (even better than the already good Cobalt and Astra) as well as a really funky, cool Gen Y car that will also sell well to the over 50 crowd.

And this is what keeps me coming back to Cheers and Gears and giving me hope in GM.

GM just needs to change some of their product thinking and some of their marketing...and then they can start taking the urban areas back.

Chris

Speaking of good small cars, IMHO, the best small car that any US automaker has built in my lifetime was the first gen Focus (and it was European, of course). I've driven several 1st gen Focuses as rentals, and even with automatics, they drove very, very nicely...taut handling and they seemed to be well put together. I've driven a buddy's SVT w/ the manual and was quite impressed. FWD hatchbacks aren't my niche, but the 1st gen Focus was an excellent car, IMHO. On the other hand, Neons and Cavaliers of the same era I've driven felt like cheap junk.

Edited January 2, 2009 by moltar

[gmcbob]

I think the Astra is the best small car that GM offers in the US right now. I drove one before I bought my Vue, and I thought it was pretty nice. I didn't drive it back to back against a Civic or a Mazda 3 though, and I'm wondering if that would change my mind.

Hey - NAV screens are actually really sweet. I never thought I'd really use one, but they actually come in handy if you're looking for a someone's house you've never been to, or if you're in a new town. Turn by turn is cool, but coupled with an actual map, it would be a lot better. I do like the idea of having Google Maps (or MSN or Yahoo! Maps, whatever) integrated into my NAV screen along with the current weather. I'm surprised we don't have that already in some cars.

[A Horse With No Name]

Speaking of good small cars, IMHO, the best small car that any US automaker has built in my lifetime was the first gen Focus (and it was European, of course). I've driven several 1st gen Focuses as rentals, and even with automatics, they drove very, very nicely...taut handling and they seemed to be well put together. I've driven a buddy's SVT w/ the manual and was quite impressed. FWD hatchbacks aren't my niche, but the 1st gen Focus was an excellent car, IMHO. On the other hand, Neons and Cavaliers of the same era I've driven felt like cheap junk.

Like I said before, I've got a good friend with a first gen SVT Focus.

This is EXACTLY what GM should be building right now (without the blue oval badge, of course)

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

I think the Astra is the best small car that GM offers in the US right now. I drove one before I bought my Vue, and I thought it was pretty nice. I didn't drive it back to back against a Civic or a Mazda 3 though, and I'm wondering if that would change my mind.

Hey - NAV screens are actually really sweet. I never thought I'd really use one, but they actually come in handy if you're looking for a someone's house you've never been to, or if you're in a new town. Turn by turn is cool, but coupled with an actual map, it would be a lot better. I do like the idea of having Google Maps (or MSN or Yahoo! Maps, whatever) integrated into my NAV screen along with the current weather. I'm surprised we don't have that already in some cars.

It's better than the civic and just plain different than the 3, but it is a huge step in the right direction.

Chris

[Drew Dowdell]

I think the Astra is the best small car that GM offers in the US right now.

Hasn't the Astra been one of the best selling cars in Europe for a while now? Just because people in the U.S. don't get it doesn't make it bad.

[A Horse With No Name]

It's a wonderful car...but we need somehow to sell Americans on driving it.

Chris

[Drew Dowdell]

It's a wonderful car...but we need somehow to sell Americans on driving it.

Chris

Perhaps a billboard or two.

[vt_hokie]

who cares what goes on at Spinghill unless you work there?

That's GM's attitude, which proves they still don't get it with regard to Saturn. They could be selling the best rebadged imports available under the Saturn name, and they still wouldn't recapture the magic of the real Saturn.

[daves87rs]

Perhaps a billboard or two.

That might help....

[daves87rs]

I think the Astra is the best small car that GM offers in the US right now. I drove one before I bought my Vue, and I thought it was pretty nice. I didn't drive it back to back against a Civic or a Mazda 3 though, and I'm wondering if that would change my mind.

Hey - NAV screens are actually really sweet. I never thought I'd really use one, but they actually come in handy if you're looking for a someone's house you've never been to, or if you're in a new town. Turn by turn is cool, but coupled with an actual map, it would be a lot better. I do like the idea of having Google Maps (or MSN or Yahoo! Maps, whatever) integrated into my NAV screen along with the current weather. I'm surprised we don't have that already in some cars.

While the Astra is nice, it looks just as dated as the Cobalt....

[regfootball]

It's better than the civic and just plain different than the 3, but it is a huge step in the right direction.

Chris

i've driven the mazda 3 enough to know its a good car, but not substantially better than the astra. it's different is all.

[turbo200]

While the Astra is nice, it looks just as dated as the Cobalt....

yes, definitely. i mentioned that before. the greenhouse is exactly the same as the cobalt sedan, so the slope of the roofline is exactly the same, doors look to be shaped exactly the same, profile is very similar to cobalt. overall, it's a dated looking car in shape and surfacing. it's hard to believe these are not merely rebadges, but we know they're not. GM probably just used the same design genes, and modified for chevy. none of this means astra is a failure or is bad looking, it's actually quite good looking, but uses a lot of styling trends that are way out of date now. the new global astra will of course come soon and look up to date.

Edited January 2, 2009 by turbo200

[Robert Hall]

yes, definitely. i mentioned that before. the greenhouse is exactly the same as the cobalt sedan, so the slope of the roofline is exactly the same, doors look to be shaped exactly the same, profile is very similar to cobalt. overall, it's a dated looking car in shape and surfacing. it's hard to believe these are not merely rebadges, but we know they're not. GM probably just used the same design genes, and modified for chevy.

It's what's called a shared platform...both are Deltas. The kiddies on here probably won't remember it, but in the old days (not that far back) GM often had 4-5 models across the brands that shared rooflines, door outer panels, etc but with brand-specific metal below the greenhouse...like the '80s J-cars, A-bodies, B-bodies, etc.

[A Horse With No Name]

Perhaps a billboard or two.

Better Ideas yet:

1. Fire whoever currently promotes this car and HIRE whoever has the ad contract for MINI. This should happen before the close of business Monday.

2. Spec racing series, similar to the TDI Cup that VW has or the MX-5 cup for the Miata. Minor race prep on a few cars, recruit some young hot shoes and go to work. Make sure you get coverage on speed channel. Really, this would result in free advertising that would pay for the cost of the cars and the series. How? every website and carmag seems to mention/discuss the TDI Cup/MX-5 cup once in awhile, and it would give the Astra some street cred amoung the tuner types.

They could even partner with someone by throwing in cheap sponsership for the series. MX-5 Cup is partnered with Playboy. Partner with MTV or whatever for the Astra.

3. Good creative advert. on prime time TV. Get a military firing squad for the person inside GM who makes this just pretty video's of an Astra running through a Colorado Canyon. The stuff needs to be CREATIVE and on target.

4. Saturn had good marketing for awhile while it was still Saturn. Start the whole Saturn owners club thing up again, and copy Scion's underground marketing campaign. Free music you can download and other events are very cheap for Toyota to promote Scion, and they bring huge results. Biggest issue here-the Astra is MUCH better than anything Scion dreams of building...so once cars got in people's hands, they would most likely enjoy them.

Likewise, sponser local rock concerts or other small stuff. I don't know what exactly, but Scion is popular with gen Y because they show that they care about their "scene".

5. Bring other models over. GM marketed the Opel's this way in the early 70's and it worked wonders. We had friends growing up that had Opels and loved them, and I know people in the SCCA that are huge fans of the 70's Opels almost 40 years later. Unique is going to sell to gen Y...which is why the SMART will sell and the Astra will sit on the lot.

There is just an element of originality and funkyness that would be easy to add to the Astra marketing and isn't there.

6. Donate a dozen Astra's to Bondurant or another driving school. Honda does this here in Ohio with the Mid Ohio drivers school at Mid Ohio. Some Dusche-bag from some car mag goes and has fun lapping at speed in an Astra and he's not going to be likely to trash it when he writes about it.

Ford and Chevy have gotten lots of exposure this way, why not Saturn?

7. Donate Astras to driving schools, or provide uber-cheap leases, so new drivers get comfortable with the product before they even get a lic. to drive. This would be cheap and simple. Dodge did this back in the late 1960's and had some great ad's about how much they cared for people's kids and their safety and so forth. A pic in Time magazine or in the local paper of a GM employee handing over the keys to a good accredited driving school would be priceless for the image of GM.

Doubt me? Our local GM dealer gave a free lease on an Olds Cierra to my drivers ed dept. You would be amazed at the number of parents who at least checked out cars at the local Olds/Cadillac dealer as a result.

Just my random thoughts...

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

yes, definitely. i mentioned that before. the greenhouse is exactly the same as the cobalt sedan, so the slope of the roofline is exactly the same, doors look to be shaped exactly the same, profile is very similar to cobalt. overall, it's a dated looking car in shape and surfacing. it's hard to believe these are not merely rebadges, but we know they're not. GM probably just used the same design genes, and modified for chevy. none of this means astra is a failure or is bad looking, it's actually quite good looking, but uses a lot of styling trends that are way out of date now. the new global astra will of course come soon and look up to date.

What do you consider "up to date" in small car design?

I don't consider the Astra to be out of date, I consider it underpowered with the automatic and poorly marketed.

Chris

[turbo200]

the only way for Astra to succeed in its current form would be for GM to care about it. Ironically it's probably the most important car for Saturn since it cracks at thier traditional base. If GM cared enough to save it, they would change the engine to the 2.4 or a 1.8 turbo currently in production, keep the price levels, and start advertising with real cool remarkable ads that are different and show the car's sporting nature and lines. only, they really don't care to make it a winner because it's a money loser.