GM Versus the Media

[Variance]

GM Versus the Media
-VarianceJ30

December 13, 2005

---

For a while now, it has been the opinion of many a GM fan that the General’s products for the most part do not get a fair shake in the American media and that import vehicles are lauded much more with little exception. GM products are scrutinized more heavily and the company’s management and recall issues are played up more. Rarely does a GM vehicle place first in comparison they appear to be subject to more “cheap shots” by journalists. The media as a whole though, seems to keep quiet when it comes to the company’s accomplishments (product and otherwise).

Why does this appear to be the case? Well, I decided the get the opinions of some C&G members on the matter and their opinions of the media when it comes to GM.

I had first asked if they felt there is indeed an inherent media bias against GM products. Some members feel that bias does exist. C&G member Oldsmoboi felt it stems from the Big 3’s poor small car offerings during the 80s and that “because of [them], the media approaches every small car from an American company with skepticism. This has filtered over into every other class of vehicle.” This is touched on when member Sixty8panther talked about the “backhanded compliments” that GM products receive such as: “Wow, this new Solstice is such a tremendous car, hard to believe it’s built by the same division that brought us such duds as the Aztek and cheesy products like the Grand Am & Sunfire.”

C&G administrator z28luvr01 thought one reason for the bias doesn’t really have to do with GM in particular or cars at all. “American society today is one of self loathing. We just love to put ourselves down. Just about everything this country makes, says, or does ends up a subject of ridicule by American media. Wine must be imported from France or Italy to be considered a “fine” wine. A leather sofa is junk unless it is made of Italian leather. Many believe that a true vacation is one in which the traveler leaves the US. Throughout recent history our President is constantly ridiculed for his decisions, whether he’s a Democrat or Republican. These are just a couple of examples, yet it’s easy to see that Americans love to hate themselves. Bashing the country’s top producer of automobiles, consequently, fits right in with our culture.”

Member wildmanjoe believed it isn’t bias per se but more that “a reporter will find it easier to get an anti-GM article published than one that is pro-GM. If the reporter believes the public would react better to a GM bashing article than one that sings its praises, they will write the GM bashing article.”

Opinions vary on which entity possesses the most bias. Sixty8 felt Car and Driver magazine is the biggest culprit. “They’d have these all inclusive sedan/sports sedan tests but the Grand Am would not even get a mention. Meantime, they’d drive the wheels off the Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Mitsubishi, Mazda, Ford, Dodge and Hyundai.” C&G member turbo200 cited “reporters like Paul Liniert, Dan Neil of the LA Times” as individual examples. Oldsmoboi and z28 felt there is no single most biased publication and that the bias is prevalent throughout the whole of the media. In fact, z28 went on to say: “...the validity of the entire automotive journalism could be brought into question.”

I then asked opinions on Consumer Reports. As is well known, Consumer Reports is a non-profit source that many American consumers consult prior to making decisions on what product to buy. Among the products they test are automobiles and they have reviewed many a GM vehicle less than favorably when it comes to things such as reliability and quality.

Some members considered CR’s credibility questionable. The general opinion was best summarized by wildmanjoe. “I believe they view past performance as an indicator of future performance, even when it isn't warranted,” he claimed. “For example, in the Consumer Reports I have sitting next to me, they are reviewing the 1996 cars, and they admit on the last time they reviewed many of them was 1992 or 1993. Using this method, they do not take into account changes that have taken place without major redesigns that can affect reliability, such as improving oil seals, head gaskets or electronic components, for example. They will also comment on such things as ergonomics and ride, which are completely subjective and can vary according to a person’s size and weight. The use of such vague terms as "bulky, cramped, clumsy, sub par, sluggish and wallowy" aid to confuse people as well.”

Regardless of how much bias exists in the media, there is one General Motors product that is generally praised by all: the Chevrolet Corvette. Few ill words are spoken against the venerable flagship of GM and especially the 505hp Z06 version. The reasons?:

“As the flagship for Chevrolet, and in some ways all of GM the Corvette’s phenomenal performance and value show off the best of what GM has to offer.” – Sixty8panther

“...it is such a phenomenal car in so many areas that...minor details can be overlooked.” – turbo200

“The Corvette hasn't had a direct competitor that could come close to its performance for less then twice its cost. It is quite literally in a class of its own.” – Oldsmoboi

“Corvettes have set a new bar for performance-per-dollar. [They] handily outdo comparable imported exotics costing several times as much, and have been described as very easy to drive by professional race car drivers. The racing versions of both cars have dominated in just about every race they have competed in. Simply put, the Corvette isn’t just the best car America has to offer, it’s the best car the world has to offer.” – z28luvr01

“People don't think of the Corvette as a Chevrolet, but as a different entity, immune from whatever else is going on in the GM line, and for the most part, it is. Your Beretta will come and go, and you will eventually buy something better than a Cavalier, but the Corvette is what you aspire to own.” – wildmanjoe

I feel that pretty much says it all.

Of course, this is not all to say GM is infallible. The General makes mistakes and misjudgments just like any other company and when they make them, they deserve criticism. Sixty8 lamented the killing of the Oldsmobile brand: “I’m not sure what the long term solution is for GM to recover but it sure as hell was not to kill Oldsmobile and keep a leech like Saturn alive. The right thing for GM to do would be to follow Chrysler’s lead. Bankruptcy is not the worst thing in the world when it allows you to restructure and take a deep breath.” Oldsmoboi wasn’t a fan of GM’s tendency to keep platforms and engines around too long: “They just recently managed to exterminate the J-body and N-body. The W-body and G-body have to be next. The current Grand Prix should not have been on a W-body. That should have been the beginning of the all new platform for the mid-sizers. Lacrosse, Impala and Monte Carlo should have followed... I'm a 3800 fan... I really am. That said, it really is time for the engine to go. I like pushrod engines too, but the HF 2.8 and HF 3.6 could take over the role of every pushrod V-6 GM currently makes. It would be a cost saving measure for GM as well since it would cut the number of V-6 engine families from 9 to 2.” Z28 acknowledged General Motor’s weakness in the design of some interiors and also: “One other criticism would be that they lack a mainstream, $20,000-$30,000 vehicle that’s fun to drive and turns heads at the same time.” (I can’t imagine what he could be referring to.)

Of course, General Motors can’t be the whipping boy of the media forever, can it? “Judgment will be good when the metal is there,” thought turbo200. “Look at early reviews for all of GM's recent offerings. Notice the phenomenon that GM's cars get great reviews when considered on their own, mostly. But when placed up against the competition, the deficiencies become even more heightened.” Oldsmoboi saw things a bit differently. “I think [the recognition of good GM products] already is starting. Cars like the Solstice, Cobalt, and CTS are proving themselves in the comparison tests. The clincher will be when a GM mid-sizer wins a comparison test against the Accord, Camry, Altima, and Mazda 6.” Z28 thought that good product wasn’t the only thing integral to changing the general media opinion of GM: “Through a combination of product, service, and marketing, GM has to create a new generation of people who have faith in the company, some of which will eventually become automotive journalists.”

Lastly, I asked what advice the members would give to the top brass of GM in the face of tough media criticism:

“Go on the offensive. Give every magazine and newspaper that writes automotive reviews free range of cars and trucks to test. Give interviews with anyone who wants them. Graciously accept every suggestion anyone makes, no matter how absurd they may be. Prove you can out-do to competition at every aspect of the game, no matter how trivial. Be ready to prove at a moments notice your products are better than anyone else’s. Find any deficiencies in your competitor’s products and exploit them in the media relentlessly. Finally, put your purse down and go to war.” – wildmanjoe

“Build every vehicle to the standard of the Corvette and make the enthusiasts happy. If GM made true competitors to the Chrysler 300C, Dodge Charger and a new more traditional Camaro to fight the retro Mustang it would help turn the tide. Same as a 1992 Viper helped to make a Dynasty and Spirit look less lame. Perception is everything. A company that is killing off their legacy and best most recognized products is not one to be looked upon as successful. In some ways a little part of GM died forever the day the B-bodies got cancelled and another part when Oldsmobile was euphemized and then again when the beloved F-bodies got the pink slip.

Only when these products are replaced can GM begin to win back customers. It’s very simple, quite basic in fact. LESS product never equals more customers.” – Sixty8panther

“Don't stop with cars. Make it a complete experience. Make something the passionate carheads in the building LOVE!” – turbo200

“Hire more car guys. Go out and find the great grandson of Henry Leland if you have to. Bob Lutz has done wonders, but I fear he is already getting out of the mindset that people my age have about cars. Keep him on the mechanicals, but you need to hire some brilliant styling guys for the sheet metal and interior. There are some people here on C&G that would be excellent. Look to your roots. Not everything has to have a smiley faced grill. Buicks of old had big, bold, sulking grills. They looked mean. The Lucerne looks like a smiling, bloated, last generation Sable. And finally, eliminate overlap. The divisions should be:

Chevrolet kept as is.

Buick-Pontiac-GMC. Move the mini-vans and Theta crossovers from Buick and Pontiac, give them to GMC. Pontiac and Buick would be platform shares of Holden tuned for their appropriate market. Let Buick keep the Rendezvous/Enclave to compete with the Lexus RX and Acura MDX.

Saturn – Saab. Just platform share the Opel lineup and bring it over.
Cadillac – Hummer. Pretty much kept as is, but add a small SUV and a small Kappa based convertible to Cadillac. Build a three quarter sized Sixteen to take on the S-Class and 7-series. Drop the DTS.” - Oldsmoboi

“It’s going to take a combination of great product, excellent service, and savvy marketing. Recent GM vehicles have proven that GM can produce vehicles that are viable, if not superior, alternatives to imported vehicles. The task at hand for GM is to now make vehicles that stand out. Today, GM has fallen into the trap of trying to beat the competition at its own game. The company was once a styling leader, and at one point could cause a whole crowd to become silent in amazement just by pulling the covers off their latest creation. GM needs to get back to that mindset, get the public to take notice, and start setting trends instead of following them.

GM’s service has made positive strides in the past few years, yet some horror stories by owners of GM vehicles prove that they still have a way to go. Perhaps GM’s brightest spot with regards to service is the Saturn dealerships. GM would be wise to take all the principles instilled into Saturn dealerships to make them the most customer-friendly in the business, and apply them to all GM dealers. Furthermore, they should enforce this strictly by penalizing dealerships that fail to adhere. Things like longer warranties or free scheduled maintenance might also prove beneficial.

Finally, GM needs to step up its marketing efforts. Recent vehicle campaigns have shown promise, yet for the most part GM’s marketing is focused on “the deal” rather than the products. Also, in most cases GM vehicles get little marketing exposure after their launch. Remember all the clever commercials for the Corvette, Cobalt, Grand Prix, and Equinox. Ads for these vehicles (and many others) have all but disappeared, replaced by the awful voiceover ads bringing us up to speed on the deal of the month.” – z28luvr01

Well, as I was able to establish (and pretty much knew all along)...

...even though GM may not be the apple of the media’s eye...

...even though they don’t always make class-leading products...

...and even though they may make questionable (or bone-headed) decisions from time to time...

General Motors will always have their loyal fans to support them through good times and bad.

---

Author’s thanks to: Oldsmoboi, Sixty8panther, turbo200, wildmanjoe and z28luvr01

This article would not have been possible without their input. :CG_all:

[turbo200]

Thanks for the article variance. though you took a little more anti-media stance than I would have liked.

[deftonesfan867]

For some reason the last sentence about being loyal through the good times and the bad made me tear up. I just want GM to keep making stellar vehicles that make me people run to the dealer and wanna get behind the wheel ASAP.

[Sixty8panther]

Wow, great article.

I'm flattered that you considered my input as relevant. I think it somehow can't be a coincedane that we're both into GM and consider the only worth wile Japanese manufacturer Nissan/Infiniti. (& Datsun :P )

Great monds think alike I suppose.

WMJ had a few great points that really made me think. esp this one:

“I believe they view past performance as an indicator of future performance, even when it isn't warranted,” he claimed. “For example, in the Consumer Reports I have sitting next to me, they are reviewing the 1996 cars, and they admit on the last time they reviewed many of them was 1992 or 1993. Using this method, they do not take into account changes that have taken place without major redesigns that can affect reliability, such as improving oil seals, head gaskets or electronic components, for example. They will also comment on such things as ergonomics and ride, which are completely subjective and can vary according to a person’s size and weight. The use of such vague terms as "bulky, cramped, clumsy, sub par, sluggish and wallowy" aid to confuse people as well.”

[regfootball]

"C&G administrator z28luvr01 thought one reason for the bias doesn’t really have to do with GM in particular or cars at all. “American society today is one of self loathing. We just love to put ourselves down. Just about everything this country makes, says, or does ends up a subject of ridicule by American media. Wine must be imported from France or Italy to be considered a “fine” wine. A leather sofa is junk unless it is made of Italian leather. Many believe that a true vacation is one in which the traveler leaves the US. Throughout recent history our President is constantly ridiculed for his decisions, whether he’s a Democrat or Republican. These are just a couple of examples, yet it’s easy to see that Americans love to hate themselves. Bashing the country’s top producer of automobiles, consequently, fits right in with our culture.”

that's it in a nutshell right there for a lot of it. i can't imagine stating this problem any better.

[tama z71]

Thats one of the best articles Ive read in a long, long time. This should be front page.

[Hudson]

Not much of a pro-and-con there, is there? Would you say that the author wants to show an anti-GM slant? Would you say that the author was bias?

[siegen]

If you go to any site that is specific to a certain brand or manufacturer, and ask the members how the media treats their vehicles in comparison to the competition, you will get a lot of the same responce from the members. Why do you think the news always talks about the bad things and not the good? Conversely, if you ask them if their cars are better, you will get plenty of "it’s the best car the world has to offer" responces. Your article is well written and organized, but you need to offer an equal number of credible opposing view points, in order for your article to carry any weight. Additionally, for the excerpts from the members to be credible, they need to be backed up with factual information from a credible source, or likewise they need to be a credible source themselves. The reason magazine reviewers and their opinions are considered credible when reviewing a car by itself (and not directly comparing it) is because they are generally believed to have an extensive amount of knowledge about every car make, and do not need a car to be present in order to compare it (because they should know everything). Whether or not that is always the case though, is something else we need to look into when reading an article or car review. Your article does bring up a lot of good points to discuss.

[CARBIZ]

But, Siegen, this is the point: these so-called experts hold themselves up to be above reproach, yet their biases are plain and clear. Case in point: the Toronto Star trashed the new Grand Prix when it came out a couple years back. Jim Kenzie was merciless, as was Laurence Yap. I guess Lutz was pissed because somebody called the Star and challenged them to a duel at the GM proving grounds. Kenzie showed up with a Maxima, both men drove it and the Grand Prix wiped the floor with the Maxima. Kenzie printed a long, drawn out apology. Yap later chimed in that "sometimes we automotive types have our own preconceptions." Yeah, right. Tell us something we don't know. Where was their balance? Or when they reviewed the "new" Freestar and took along a woman who had had two Windstars and hated them. Another unbalanced, biased piece of journalism. Or when the Matrix is said to be a little underpowered but, hey, it has a Toyota engine and gets great gas mileage, but the Colorado is just plain derided for only having a 5 cylinder, getting no credit for its gas mileage..... I could go on, but for the most part I just don't read any of the automotive publications any more. I do my own research, I get out and drive the competition and I learn from these type of sites where all sides get aired - even when I don't always agree with them.

[pow]

But, Siegen, this is the point:  these so-called experts hold themselves up to be above reproach, yet their biases are plain and clear.
  Case in point:  the Toronto Star trashed the new Grand Prix when it came out a couple years back.  Jim Kenzie was merciless, as was Laurence Yap.  I guess Lutz was pissed because somebody called the Star and challenged them to a duel at the GM proving grounds.
  Kenzie showed up with a Maxima, both men drove it and the Grand Prix wiped the floor with the Maxima.  Kenzie printed a long, drawn out apology.  Yap later chimed in that "sometimes we automotive types have our own preconceptions."
  Yeah, right.  Tell us something we don't know.  Where was their balance? 
  Or when they reviewed the "new" Freestar and took along a woman who had had two Windstars and hated them.  Another unbalanced, biased piece of journalism. 
  Or when the Matrix is said to be a little underpowered but, hey, it has a Toyota engine and gets great gas mileage, but the Colorado is just plain derided for only having a 5 cylinder, getting no credit for its gas mileage.....
  I could go on, but for the most part I just don't read any of the automotive publications any more.  I do my own research, I get out and drive the competition and I learn from these type of sites where all sides get aired - even when I don't always agree with them.

[post="58386"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

So you really think the GP, Freestar, and Colorado are fine, class-leading products?

[Guest gmrebirth]

But, Siegen, this is the point:  these so-called experts hold themselves up to be above reproach, yet their biases are plain and clear.
  Case in point:  the Toronto Star trashed the new Grand Prix when it came out a couple years back.  Jim Kenzie was merciless, as was Laurence Yap.  I guess Lutz was pissed because somebody called the Star and challenged them to a duel at the GM proving grounds.
  Kenzie showed up with a Maxima, both men drove it and the Grand Prix wiped the floor with the Maxima.  Kenzie printed a long, drawn out apology.  Yap later chimed in that "sometimes we automotive types have our own preconceptions."
  Yeah, right.  Tell us something we don't know.  Where was their balance? 
  Or when they reviewed the "new" Freestar and took along a woman who had had two Windstars and hated them.  Another unbalanced, biased piece of journalism. 
  Or when the Matrix is said to be a little underpowered but, hey, it has a Toyota engine and gets great gas mileage, but the Colorado is just plain derided for only having a 5 cylinder, getting no credit for its gas mileage.....
  I could go on, but for the most part I just don't read any of the automotive publications any more.  I do my own research, I get out and drive the competition and I learn from these type of sites where all sides get aired - even when I don't always agree with them.

[post="58386"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

But wait, you don't seem to bash Kenzie for his comment on the Impala, where he was quoted as saying "the new Impala blows the doors off the competition" and I've seen GM use this quote a lot in their ads.

Make up your mind. Either you hate Kenzie or you don't.

You can't like Kenzie when he praises domestics, and then hate him when he dislikes domestics. It just doesn't work that way.

[Guest gmrebirth]

So you really think the GP, Freestar, and Colorado are fine, class-leading products?

[post="58413"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

This is C & G, would you expect anything less?

I wouldn't be surprised if the Pontiac Fiero gets worshipped around here, or the first gen Windstar.

[Flybrian]

This is C & G, would you expect anything less?

I wouldn't be surprised if the Pontiac Fiero gets worshipped around here, or the first gen Windstar.

[post="58524"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

We go after the site and other people's opinions now. Cool.

[regfootball]

we already despise America. so just bite the hand that feeds just a little harder...... you know what? i live in the best country in the world. The US doesn't alway tackle challenges head on,but we still have the mostdesire as a society to advance the world than ANYONE else. We have the best entertainers, uncountable numbers of excellent businesses, lavish housing, big ass malls, plasma tvs for sale, dora the explorer, and girls gone wild! we have TACO BELL. We have young attractive foreign brides across the globe who would rather get with some old ugly cranky middle aged American dude than stay in their own countries. We got department stores and toilet paper Got styrofoam boxes for the ozone layer Got a man of the people, says keep hope alive Got fuel to burn, got roads to drive. ----Keep on rockin' in the free world (neil young) Japan inc.and Germany built some damn nicecars. But American cars are pretty nice, too. Some of the cars offered for sale by AMURCHAN companies outright KICKSERIOUS FRICKIN ass. Corvette, CTSv, GXP GP, Ford GT, Fusion, Mustang GT, sure...a lot of these very cars have flaws...but dammit, go buy one and you'll enjoy the hell out of it. Most bitchers don't get that the good American products they love to trash are likely still 5 times better than the 10 year old pile of crap sitting in their garage, or the 5 year old corolla with too many door dings to mention because the sheet metal is so thin. what cracks me up is how people think their choice of car validates your worth in society. MY GOD, drive what you want and what suits you. You despeise your country so much you won't even TEST DRIVE an American name car? People in this country have got to start feeling a little better about this country. its not that bad a place to be. Edited December 14, 2005 by regfootball

[Drew Dowdell]

You can't like Kenzie when he praises domestics, and then hate him when he dislikes domestics. It just doesn't work that way.

[post="58523"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Sure it can. If Kenzie is hating on the Grand Prix unjustly while giving the Maxima praises it doesn't deserve. Call him out on it. It sounds like Lutz did just that. It's quite possible the Impala does impress him that much. Due to biases in the media <they hate the domestics>, we take a positive, fair review of a domestic pretty easily. When they put out comparisons where we the readers know the outcome before reading the artical, then there is trouble.

[CARBIZ]

NObody said all the media is biased all the time, it is just that when you add up the press, they slam the Big Three far more and far more unjustly than Japan INc. The key to my point above was the admission from Laurence Yap, who loved anything from Asia, that they do have biases. Of course they do, they are human. I never said the Colorado or Freestar were class leading. In fact, the Freestar is a lump, but why would the Star deliberately seek out someone who had two Windstars and hated them both - what kind of balance would that be? The STar has nitpicked at GM for years. Frankly, if I was in charge of advertising, I would have yanked my ads a long time ago. Does anybody remember the so-called gas tank problem GM/Nissan/Ford experienced in southern Ontario back in 2003? Petro Canada later admitted that they had had a bad patch of gasoline go through the system. It contaminated the gas tank sensors in a lot of Malibus, Aleros and Cavaliers, but also effected Nissan and Ford, too. The problem was isolated to ONtario, not Illinois, not California, not Manitoba - ONTARIO. That alone should have informed the idiots at the STar that it wasn't GM's fault. The problem was largely over by the late summer of 2003. My own car was effected, but after a gas line cleaner was run through it, it was fine. Was the Star satisfied with that? No. In December 2003 they ran a front page 1/3 article of their Saturday paper (circulation of over 1 million) about some poor woman who ran out of gas on the 400 coming down from Barrie (I am from that area and what idiot would leave town with less than a 1/4 tank of gas anyway!?) in her Cavalier. A third page on the front page! And there is more... they ran another full page inside the A section about her plight, then the Business section talked about it, too. This was SIX months after the problem was over. Agenda? I'd say so.

[razoredge]

Lord, how our resident rice boys cry when they find people actually like GMs and point out the bias BS that has led people to think they should not be caught dead in an American owned & manufactured car. As soon as the Japs began buying industries within our country and properties to place their industries on, it suddenly became alright to be a sell out because "its made in America so its A O K Incidently when Tommy Kendall and crew tested the GP against others in that segment it showed favorably against other sedans. Had the FASTEST track times and its FWD. The GTO was also placed against cars in its segment and showed favorably as well. I posted about this during the summer some time. I think a small handful of posters made comment. Unlike the GM bashing threads where they come out in numbers. GM has some stuff to straighten out but not nearly as much as the American population.

[Hudson]

Your article is well written and organized, but you need to offer an equal number of credible opposing view points, in order for your article to carry any weight. Additionally, for the excerpts from the members to be credible, they need to be backed up with factual information from a credible source, or likewise they need to be a credible source themselves.

Agreed.

[Hudson]

But, Siegen, this is the point:  these so-called experts hold themselves up to be above reproach, yet their biases are plain and clear.

No. They don't "hold themselves up to be above reproach." These are people who's job it is to write about cars. The articles are NOT necessarily objective since most creative writing (and that's what automotive articles typically are) is quite subjective, or else it's not enjoyable to read. Buff books do not write for people to make buying decisions, they write for car people to read. Car people will have their own opinions and will buy whatever they want no matter what Car and Driver or Road & Track says.

Sure, automakers will use those quote to promote their products, but that's all in the market departments of the manufacturers and the publishers. The writers are simply writing something good to read.

When people as for my opinion on a vehicle, I'll give them an objective overview and tell them of my biases. If I'm writing something, my first priority is to write something entertaining to read while keeping the facts straight. I'm sure I lace my writings with my opinions, but making it enjoyable to read is very important.

[Sixty8panther]

I'm sure I lace my writings with my opinions, but making it enjoyable to read is very important.

[post="58595"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

There is a differance between that and simply dismissing ANYTHING wiht a Chevy or Pontiac Badge altogeather.

You can't honestly tell me that you've never witnised a case of disgustingly blatant favoritism in a Car Rag. C'mon we've all seen them and 99% of the time the bias is AGAINST an american manufacturer.

And I think you're wrong, when a car comes out from Honda or Toyota and it's immediately regarded by them as the greatests damn thing since sliced bread it sends a clear message to the brainless masses of the world.

Ask the typical idiot on the street about his oppinion about cars and he'll tell you how Japanese cars are well built but American cars suck. Nevermind this same moron is barelly capable of cheking his oil in his Corolla.

Do you think he forlumated his oppinion based on a fair and even keeled evaluation of a bunch of American and Japanese vehicles or did he just formulate and reinforce his oppinion by thumbing through a car magazinbe here and there at Barnes & Noble?

[Hudson]

There is a differance between that and simply dismissing ANYTHING wiht a Chevy or Pontiac Badge altogeather.

You can't honestly tell me that you've never witnised a case of disgustingly blatant favoritism in a Car Rag. C'mon we've all seen them and 99% of the time the bias is AGAINST an american manufacturer.

And I think you're wrong, when a car comes out from Honda or Toyota and it's immediately regarded by them as the greatests damn thing since sliced bread it sends a clear message to the brainless masses of the world.

Ask the typical idiot on the street about his oppinion about cars and he'll tell you how Japanese cars are well built but American cars suck. Nevermind this same moron is barelly capable of cheking his oil in his Corolla.

Do you think he forlumated his oppinion based on a fair and even keeled evaluation of a bunch of American and Japanese vehicles or did he just formulate and reinforce his oppinion by thumbing through a car magazinbe here and there at Barnes & Noble?

I read quite a few different magazines and to a GM I'm sure they seem that GM products are just dismissed, but that's just not the case. I know a number of automotive writers and they find Hondas and Toyota to be typically better than the competitive GM product...as do I.

Did you miss the recent four-way test where the Camry came is LAST (behind a Ford and a Hyundai)? That doesn't seem like there's an automatic love-fest with all things Toyota/Honda.

I really wish I could take a few of you out in a new GM product and a new competitive product from another manufacturer so that I could show you the problems. I don't believe I would convince all of you (fanatics are fanatics, after all), but I'm sure a few of you would see what I'm talking about.

GM is not the enemy of car magazines. GM is its own worst enemy.

[CARBIZ]

I agree that GM's Achille's heel is their interior design and on some vehicles the fit and finish may not be "world class," but that is only important to car critics. The average consumer doesn't run around with a dime to see if it fits between the door and the front fender! The average consumer doesn't give a damn if a transmission has 4 or 5 or 6 spds. as long as it works! Some of us you don't need to drive around in the competition. Our company owns two Toyota stores and I can assure you - Toyota has a lot of bodies buried in the back yard, they just bury them a little deeper. It is what the media considers avante garde and the flavor of the month that is shoved down the consumer's throats as "must haves." In many cases this only serves to confuse the consumer. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the current Malibu as a car. Even the 4 cylinder rides, handles and drives perfectly fine. It is decent on gas. It has done well in quality surveys. It is very well priced. Yet, the media assails it for "cheap" interiors, "light" steering and nitpicks on everything else. It is the same price as a Corolla, for Gawd's sake, but OMIGOD! - doesn't come in a 5 spd manual or have a 5 spd. automtic, so let's nitpick it to death so everyone buys the Camry because OF COURSE IT IS BETTER.

[Satty]

I really wish I could take a few of you out in a new GM product and a new competitive product from another manufacturer so that I could show you the problems. I don't believe I would convince all of you (fanatics are fanatics, after all), but I'm sure a few of you would see what I'm talking about.

I used to rag on the Camry like evryone else, then I test drove (and ended up buying) one that had almost 90,000 miles on it and was more solid feeling than any new GM product I had ever driven. I think the best way to show people what you are talking about is to let them ride in equivalent brand new and equivalent five year old, hundred thousand mile models.

[enzl]

There is a differance between that and simply dismissing ANYTHING wiht a Chevy or Pontiac Badge altogeather.

You can't honestly tell me that you've never witnised a case of disgustingly blatant favoritism in a Car Rag. C'mon we've all seen them and 99% of the time the bias is AGAINST an american manufacturer.

[post="58614"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Perhaps the bias has to do with the years of crap that have been generated by GM. As in life, just because someone has 'found religion', that doesn't undo past sins.

I'd love for each and every 'biased-press' whiner to select vehicles that were produced by the General between 1980 and 2000 and put together a cogent argument as to how that vehicle was truly 'World Class'. Can we name more than a handfull? NO.

Yes, there's bias in the media, but what you choose to ignore is that it's been earned over time, it isn't some plot or plan to destroy American manufacturers. It isn't, get over it and get on with it.

My livelihood is largely dependant upon the quality, skill and product of GM, Ford and DCX. I'm concerned that this site encourages another American pastime of blaming someone else for our troubles.

[mphmag]

Hey guys, As a member of the media I've been called liberal many times even though almost every company I've worked for has been conservative. In fact I don't even know if my current employer is liberal or conservative. To me it makes no difference to the product. As a critic when I covered music I was much more opinionated than I am about cars I cover now. There is much more "hard" evidence to the automobile industry than the music industry. Someone somewhere is going to like Ashley Simpson and there is nothing you can do to explain that is a poor selection of music to them. The problem with auto enthusiasts is they are always right too. The critic therefore must be wrong. I find it hilarious that many times people will tell me which car is better (miata vs solstice most recently) and they haven't even driven them both. Often they haven’t even driven ONE! That gets my panties in a bunch. At Autoblog I was very blunt about how I reviewed cars and could provide direct evidence for almost everything I wrote. With MPH we're still feeling our way with the new technology before focusing on online content. but the print magazine offers some of the wittiest insight around. It may be funny but often it is more transparent than anything you'd see in consumer reports let alone the other buff books. I think in the end this will turn more people on to the mag than the pretty design/photos/babes. As to GM itself. They are being overly defensive about their products. While I found the Impala SS a great ride boy is it boring on the outside. If it had been a compelling design people would have forgiven the FWD power. You can mess up in one place but not two. That’s why people gloss over the 300/Magnum/Charger’s horrible interior quality. Have you floored an SRT version yet? It’s quite amazing. Even the stock 300C was a dream to drive. We (the media and MPH in particular) do prop GM when they do things right. The Z06 tops our spins of the year. It beat out the Ferrari F430 and BMW M5. But the Solstice did not make the list while the Miata did. This isn’t because of some bias. There are a ton of great cars out there and GM is building very good cars. And an occasional great one. You don’t see people slobbering over the Toyota Avalon because it’s a Toyota. Most of those reviews were “Toyota builds another very good car you won’t mind paying for.” Nothing special. The Honda Civic I think is getting good press because of A) Great (or at least you can agree “distinctive”) Design. B). Hybrid Model C.) Si model and attractive coupe. Eddie says the Si is just awesome and tops the current RSX Type S in many respects. For under $20K! I saw Edmunds say it was the best FWD car they’ve ever driven. Sooooo…let’s not dash on the Civic thinking it is from a Honda bias. And lastly sometimes the bias is right. A Cadillac does not feel as upscale as any of the European nameplates it competes against. It just doesn’t. Sorry. The DTS is very close though. But still is not there. However, I just read a comparo in MT between the STS V and the Merc CLS AMG. It said they are almost identically priced. Actually the STS was $17K, that’s 17! Less than the Merc. I don’t care if you can afford $77K car, that is a huge difference and didn’t seem to matter to the reviewer. I would’ve pointed that out a bit better. So will you take the difference in quality for the price is the question. And that is an entirely different story. Ah I’m rambling now. Love this forum. Thanks for letting me vent so much. Dave

[Satty]

Thanks for your view on this. Now I cant wait for everyone to come say that you are blind to your own bias, blah blah blah. You brought up Miata vs. Solstice, I haven't driven either, I probably wont for my cheap roadster money I'd get in into a Z3, but I do have an opinion based on looks, since I have now seen a Solstice in person. Its girly, everything about the appearence says, "Look at me, I'm a sorority girl." The Solstice would almost work better as a Satrun and the Sky as a Pontiac. Edited December 14, 2005 by Satty

[Hudson]

I agree that GM's Achille's heel is their interior design and on some vehicles the fit and finish may not be "world class," but that is only important to car critics.  The average consumer doesn't run around with a dime to see if it fits between the door and the front fender!  The average consumer doesn't give a damn if a transmission has 4 or 5 or 6 spds. as long as it works!

Buyers don't typically care about the number of ratios in an automatic transmission (can't say the same about manuals, but so few Americans buy manuals that it doesn't matter for this argument). But that's where our agreement ends.

A difference in fit and finish or interior design DOES matter to a buyer. I highly doubt that any buyer (and most of the media) is going to measure door gap with a micrometer. But when you get inside the car and there are burrs on the plastic turn signal lever (something the average driver should touch daily) or when the floor shifter has as much play as a manual transmission in neutral or when the dashboard sounds hollow or tinny, a buyer will notice.

I've shown Pontiacs to people and they've agreed that the "unfinished" feeling of a turn signal makes that car feel cheaper than an Accord or Camry with a "finished" switch. From power window switches to dashboard fit, buyers notice.

When buyers come into a Chevrolet store over and over, chances are they've never driven anything else. The same goes with executives for Ford and GM. If you compare the two in the ways that an everyday driver does (fuel economy, NVH, interior fit and finish, seat comfort, ergonamics, etc.), GM products do not typically bubble to the top.

[turbo200]

No. They don't "hold themselves up to be above reproach." These are people who's job it is to write about cars. The articles are NOT necessarily objective since most creative writing (and that's what automotive articles typically are) is quite subjective, or else it's not enjoyable to read. Buff books do not write for people to make buying decisions, they write for car people to read. Car people will have their own opinions and will buy whatever they want no matter what Car and Driver or Road & Track says.

Sure, automakers will use those quote to promote their products, but that's all in the market departments of the manufacturers and the publishers. The writers are simply writing something good to read.

When people as for my opinion on a vehicle, I'll give them an objective overview and tell them of my biases. If I'm writing something, my first priority is to write something entertaining to read while keeping the facts straight. I'm sure I lace my writings with my opinions, but making it enjoyable to read is very important.

[post="58595"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

quoted for emphasis. despite what many here think, it is a journalist's job to be as objective as freely possible. This means there is a system of checks and balances out there that will determine if a journalist has gone too far off the kilter. Remember the JErry Flint article responding to Dan Neil's G6 review? The media is responsible to the public, if they were defintely being too one-sided there would be a lot of people looking for thier job. But a large portion of the American public agrees with the media, perhaps it is those that complain about bias here who need to get thier bias-meter checked.

[turbo200]

My livelihood is largely dependant upon the quality, skill and product of GM, Ford and DCX. I'm concerned that this site encourages another American pastime of blaming someone else for our troubles.

[post="58667"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

There are many here that try to defend that point of view, myself included. The overwhelming majority here probably feels this way. It's the staunch loyalists who don't understand and won't compare objectively.

[balthazar]

No, the bias exists and it's often clear. It's not every writer and it's not applied toward every GM (or domestic) vehicle, but there are subtle (and many times grossly obvious) signs of it if you read carefully. Some of it is justified, most of it is not. Also, pressure to be entertaining (to improve circulation) often comes at the expense of objectivity and even-handedness, which is counter to the product-reviewer's purpose, to inform. If the reviewers purpose instead is primarily to entertain, it becomes wrestling of the 'sports' world; fun but not taken seriously. Which is where many publications are slowly sliding.

[KaliRover]

awesome article, great read!!!

[capriceman]

To me FOG's sig tells it all on the first line!! Great Article!!! Ill be back with a response later

[turbo200]

No, the bias exists and it's often clear. It's not every writer and it's not applied toward every GM (or domestic) vehicle, but there are subtle (and many times grossly obvious) signs of it if you read carefully. Some of it is justified, most of it is not.

Also, pressure to be entertaining (to improve circulation) often comes at the expense of objectivity and even-handedness, which is counter to the product-reviewer's purpose, to inform. If the reviewers purpose instead is primarily to entertain, it becomes wrestling of the 'sports' world; fun but not taken seriously. Which is where many publications are slowly sliding.

[post="58738"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

When publications acknowledge the improvements in current GM products, it becomes clear that there is even-handedness. Impala reviews have been stellar, for it being a modest reengineering, this car has completely done a 180 in the view of the press. Improvements to the feel, the experience, will yield those results. I don't share your view that publications are becoming like the "wrestling" genre; as Hudson stated, these mags have to be entertaining to read. That's what makes them enjoyable.

I challenge you to drive a Honda Accord against any GM midsize car, the Impala is the best of the bunch, but I'd encourage the Lacrosse or G6, and then come back with an even-handed review. Drive them back to back.

[enzl]

There are many here that try to defend that point of view, myself included. The overwhelming majority here probably feels this way. It's the staunch loyalists who don't understand and won't compare objectively.

[post="58735"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I agree. It's not fair to paint every diehard member of this site as an ostrich, but I believe that a more interesting and compelling board would be creative if this community of enthusiasts were more about constructive criticism and less about cheerleading.

I'm a car nut, period. I look at all cars like they're my kids...there's something to love, something of merit in even the least of them. That being said, I find it dissapointing that the press, the unions, the Japanese, healthcare, etc...seem to get more ire directed at them than the management of GM.

It takes the same amount of money to design a good looking vehicle as it does a boring one. It costs less than 20% of the average rebate on a GM vehicle to equip it with quality interior pieces. I can't understand how these obvious points escape otherwise capable, intelligent people.

My current ride is a 2000 Audi A6 (I get an inventoried used vehicle every two weeks or so). The care, cost and time spent on the interior of these cars is incredible. I can't see how reverse engineering this stuff is hard. A current $60k Caddy should have an interior comprable to a 200 Audi, IMO. I'm certain that the consumers trading in my A6 expect that when they finally drag themselves back into a Caddy dealer after seeing the surface appeal of some exciting looking product!

[-Camaro-]

I think the media is biased against GM, well not all of it, but when I heard some mag critisized the XLR, because the dash left fingerprints, I was disgusted by that... And it's obvious a mag has some sort of bias when they bash a vehicle, but others praise it....

[enzl]

I think the media is biased against GM, well not all of it, but when I heard some mag critisized the XLR, because the dash left fingerprints, I was disgusted by that... And it's obvious a mag has some sort of bias when they bash a vehicle, but others praise it....

[post="58840"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

If that's the worst they said, we wouldn't be having this thread.

[razoredge]

Ya know, those of you that have just spent that time downing us. We are plugging for GM, be it Buick or ------------, or Pontiac, or Chevy, or Cadillac. Thats why we are here in the first place. Others ? Well, hard to say why they are here. Maybe publicity people for Toyota, Honda, BMW, who knows?

I have seen each and every member here that supports GM during these bash fests, agree with all the areas possible to mention, that improvement is needed or would be better. Yet at the same time we dont come here everyday to listen you other fellas bash GM non-stop. Then the best part it how we become bashed or called Ostrich, staunch loyalist, communist, socialist, you name it, we must endure it. And GOOD GOLLY, GO DANG IT, DONT YOU DARE STAND UP FOR GM.

The only thing for us to do is sit and watch you bash GM for each and every little detail that suits your needs. Because if we do not sit and watch, but rather offer any resistance to the non stop bashing. We become the punchin' bag.

the auto media is not bias toward any manufacture and their people media counterpart did not chase down Diana like blue tics in a full moon.

<_<

[mystik]

Well, lets face it, GM does get bashed. A lot. Look at the Hummer H3 articles. Look at the Pontiac Solstice articles. The cars have flaws, yes. Every car has flaws. But what the magazines do is draw out those flaws to the point where its all you think about. Its not "Wow that H3 is a beast off road, has really comfortable seats and a great interior!", its "Man that I-5 really sucks, I cant believe they put that in there, Id never drive it." If it were a Toyota, you know damn well that they'd be focusing a lot more on the positives than the negatives. Same thing for the Solstice. They nitpick. I dont really understand why. I sat in a DTS, an STS, and a new Benz. The interiors of the three did not significantly differ (to me at least). I thought the DTS's plastic was high quality and nice. On par with the Benz. Wait till the new FJ Cruiser comes out. It WILL be compared to the H3, and it WILL beat it. Significantly. Even though Im positive the H3 will kick its ass off roading. It IS fashionable to take shots at GM. Motor Trend said it best "Will these new SUV's be class leading? Of course. Their the new state of the art SUVs." Thats a pot shot at GMs GMT-900s. Saying 'duh their new.'. Go read the new Motor Trend and tell me they arent biased. Car and Driver as well. Im not going to seat there and say that the Impala and Cobalt are class leading, because their not. But the H3 and Solstice, and XLR and STS and DTS, they are all excellent vehicles. And if each one of them had a different badge on them, then they would get SIGNIFICANTLY better reviews. I guarantee it.

[enzl]

Ya know, those of you that have just spent that time downing us. We are plugging for GM, be it Buick or ------------, or Pontiac, or Chevy, or Cadillac. Thats why we are here in the first place. Others ? Well, hard to say why they are here. Maybe publicity people for Toyota, Honda, BMW, who knows?

I have seen each and every member here that supports GM during these bash fests, agree with all the areas possible to mention, that improvement is needed or would be better. Yet at the same time we dont come here everyday to listen you other fellas bash GM non-stop. Then the best part it how we become bashed or called Ostrich, staunch loyalist, communist, socialist, you name it, we must endure it. And GOOD GOLLY, GO DANG IT, DONT YOU DARE STAND UP FOR GM.

The only thing for us to do is sit and watch you bash GM for each and every little detail that suits your needs. Because if we do not sit and watch, but rather offer any resistance to the non stop bashing. We become the punchin' bag.

the auto media is not bias toward any manufacture and their people media counterpart did not chase down Diana like blue tics in a full moon.

<_<

[post="58901"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Perhaps this is where we just have to agree to disagree.

I will agree that the media can be hard on GM, but the bias charge is a cop-out. I reiterate my call for anyone to defend the product GM was putting out for 20 years ('80-'00) as 'class leading'...you see, you can't. That's not bashing, its a fact.

GM earned its position in the auto universe today, thru years of neglect of their core customers and product. They let everyone down.

I sincerely hope that GM's new stuff is great. It has to be. I get no joy from being skeptical about them and I would be the first person on this board to compliment them when and if they get it right. That being said, I think scapegoating the media for stating the obvious is not where the energy should be directed.

[balthazar]

I will agree that the media can be hard on GM, but the bias charge is a cop-out. I reiterate my call for anyone to defend the product GM was putting out for 20 years ('80-'00) as 'class leading'...you see, you can't. That's not bashing, its a fact.
GM earned its position in the auto universe today, thru years of neglect of their core customers and product. They let everyone down.

You're talking about the entire Corporation's product line unilaterally; what other single company has all class-leading products? Oh, that's right; NONE. Let's see you defend 20 years of any singular auto manufacturer as unilaterally class leading...you see, you can't.

And you know even as you gloss over every single model, there are a number that are at the top of their segment during this period. '92 STS is one great example.

"you can't"... "A fact"... "everyone"... " the obvious"...
It's exactly this type of generalization and fictionalizing that gives modern 'journalists' a bad name and garners them so much scorn. This is exactly how charges of 'biased' are earned & justified.

[CARBIZ]

Part of the problem is that the MEDIA (and I am generalizing a great deal here) with their supposed superior knowledge of engine design, mechanicals, etc., will look down their nose at something that isn't the way THEY WOULD WANT TO BUY IT. If we are going to go back 20 years and bitch about everything GM has ever built, then let's make sure we are comparing apples to apples. Let's look at a '91 Cavalier and compare it to a '91 Corolla or Civic. First of all, how many would you still find on the road of each? DesRosier Marketing in Canada did just that study back in 2000 and was shocked that far more GMs were still on the road, as a percentage of what had been originally sold, than Toyotas or HOndas. I personally have had many customers still rattling around in their 12 year old Cavaliers and they love them. I am sure there are lots of 12 year old Civics, too. But just because the Civic has a DOHC engine and the 2.2 was a pushrod, does not mean that the car is necesssarily BETTER. The average consumer doesn't CARE, as long as the car is reliable beyond their payment period and beyond. For every horror story about the Crapalier, I can name two of people who won't part with them. But when the rags and papers keep on telling them that GM is crap, the average consumer gets nervous. Bashing my favorite rag once again, Mark Richardson of the Toronto Star tried to talk his own mother (very publicly in an article earlier this year) out of a new Cavalier purchase, even though he admitted that she had had no problems with it and it was a reliable car! She finally balked because the nearest Toyota store was too far for her. When these very public biases are blabbed in very public forums, such as the country's biggest newspaper, it makes me very angry. I can go and sell any product I want. I have been wooed by other product lines; however I CHOOSE to sell GM because I BELIEVE in their products and because I understand that every Japanese or German car sold is another nail in the coffin of the most important business in North America.

[enzl]

[I]
You're talking about the entire Corporation's product line unilaterally; what other single company has all class-leading products? Oh, that's right; NONE. Let's see you defend 20 years of any singular auto manufacturer as unilaterally class leading...you see, you can't.

And you know even as you gloss over every single model, there are a number that are at the top of their segment during this period. '92 STS is one great example.

"you can't"... "A fact"... "everyone"... " the obvious"...
It's exactly this type of generalization and fictionalizing that gives modern 'journalists' a bad name and garners them so much scorn. This is exactly how charges of 'biased' are earned & justified.

[post="59107"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

[/quote]

You've made my point for me: I'll give you one model year of the STS and the GMT-800's....possible a 'vette or two as well in the 90's.

But, that's it! As a proportion of their total product, that has to be one of the lowest percentages of any co., perhaps barring Yugos and Fiats of the time period in question.

I haven't glossed over anything, only pointed out what apparently is obvious to 'most' people. (Do the quotes around 'most' make it a more valid argument?)

Semantics aside, you know I'm accurate. As I must repeat, I derive no joy from these observations (I know that you don't like me to term them 'facts'). This is a storm years in the making, not some cockaroach Wagoner found in his cereal this morning.

BTW-I object to the term 'fictionalizing' since that implies there's no basis in fact for these biased-journalist's findings - which means you're defending your point of view using the same 'faulty' logic you're accusing me of!

If you really believe that the points made in sub-par reviews don't exist or have no real basis, then I can't help you...although I have a bridge in Brooklyn I can sell ya real cheap!

[turbo200]

I will agree that the media can be hard on GM, but the bias charge is a cop-out. I reiterate my call for anyone to defend the product GM was putting out for 20 years ('80-'00) as 'class leading'...you see, you can't. That's not bashing, its a fact.
GM earned its position in the auto universe today, thru years of neglect of their core customers and product. They let everyone down.

You're talking about the entire Corporation's product line unilaterally; what other single company has all class-leading products? Oh, that's right; NONE. Let's see you defend 20 years of any singular auto manufacturer as unilaterally class leading...you see, you can't.

And you know even as you gloss over every single model, there are a number that are at the top of their segment during this period. '92 STS is one great example.

"you can't"... "A fact"... "everyone"... " the obvious"...
It's exactly this type of generalization and fictionalizing that gives modern 'journalists' a bad name and garners them so much scorn. This is exactly how charges of 'biased' are earned & justified.

[post="59107"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

if there is a number of models, then list them. IF the STS is the only one you can think of, and defend with facts, then you are simply stating a ludicrous argument.

[turbo200]

[quote name='enzl' date='Dec 15 2005, 01:29 PM']
[I]
You're talking about the entire Corporation's product line unilaterally; what other single company has all class-leading products? Oh, that's right; NONE. Let's see you defend 20 years of any singular auto manufacturer as unilaterally class leading...you see, you can't.

And you know even as you gloss over every single model, there are a number that are at the top of their segment during this period. '92 STS is one great example.

"you can't"... "A fact"... "everyone"... " the obvious"...
It's exactly this type of generalization and fictionalizing that gives modern 'journalists' a bad name and garners them so much scorn. This is exactly how charges of 'biased' are earned & justified.

[post="59107"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

[/quote]

You've made my point for me: I'll give you one model year of the STS and the GMT-800's....possible a 'vette or two as well in the 90's.

But, that's it! As a proportion of their total product, that has to be one of the lowest percentages of any co., perhaps barring Yugos and Fiats of the time period in question.

I haven't glossed over anything, only pointed out what apparently is obvious to 'most' people. (Do the quotes around 'most' make it a more valid argument?)

Semantics aside, you know I'm accurate. As I must repeat, I derive no joy from these observations (I know that you don't like me to term them 'facts'). This is a storm years in the making, not some cockaroach Wagoner found in his cereal this morning.

BTW-I object to the term 'fictionalizing' since that implies there's no basis in fact for these biased-journalist's findings - which means you're defending your point of view using the same 'faulty' logic you're accusing me of!

If you really believe that the points made in sub-par reviews don't exist or have no real basis, then I can't help you...although I have a bridge in Brooklyn I can sell ya real cheap!

[post="59128"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

[/quote]


this is as concise and as accurate as anyone has managed to be on this website with regards to this issue. the simple bottom line fact is GM has not had more than 5 class-leading products in the last 16 years. This HAS been an extreme disservice to employees, fans, and customers, and they are now taking the brunt of the pain ir retribution for years of subpar products.

[enzl]

Thank you for your support t200... I'm not a hater, just a realist. I have a real passion for the subject and I'm concerned about the future for all US car fans.

[razoredge]

OK turbo - I have asked you this question many many times and never got an answer.

"if there is a number of models, then list them......, and defend with facts, then you are simply stating a ludicrous argument." ????

So yea, how about you do that. You wanna bust on the GM's of the 80's give me your leaders ?

Im not going to give you a list or put alot of effort into researching cars I know little about. At the same time I just cant even remember a Toyota or Nissan from the 80's. THey both built one hell of a "mini" truck, but how about cars, I have a feeling they were exactly what you are bitching about GM over. FOrgettable. Now lets move to the early 90's, give me your favorites ?

80's - I loved the Rivieras, Toronados, LeSabre's and Delta 88's, Regencys and Park Avenues, the W body trio Regal/Grand Prix/Cutlass, sadly the Buick was the only one to have a competitve engine but that WAS another topic. Then the Caddys were nice but again the Caddy V8 was troublesome, (was it the only troublesome engine on the market?) That dang 38, it was just so good everyone hates it.

In the 90's GM brought us the N*, A* and S*. They got great performance from the Q4 but that too was troublesome, none the less you can see the money trail. Yet you claim they did nothing during these years. We got the Aurora, a nice Riviera (some like some dont) Eldorado and yes the Seville. I think the 92-99 Eighty Eights are titz and I know many that though the same of the PA or Regency, Lesabre was setting records or something wasnt it ?

Once agian let me remind you technoheads, the Aurora race engine dominated for years, nothing could touch it, yet you wanna act like GM did nothing and had nothing.

Your just spinnin the same spin that this topic is all about

BIAS MEDOW COOKIES

[razoredge]

Incidently, I shouldnt have to even say this but it seems to be an ignored factor to your every car needs to be class leading attitude. Nobody, not one, builds as many models of cars as General Motors, they have or did have classes that no one other than Ford or Chrysler had product in. You just way out of control. I wonder if your girlfriend is good enough for you and if the next model that came along was just slightly better at something you would start riding her about all her faults ? Ya know mine aint the best cook but shes one damn good companion. potato potato

[turbo200]

razor, this is not list our favorite cars day. In the last 15 years, list more than 5 cars [out of the 90 and more models per year they built] from GM that were class-leading. Thsi time back your arguments with factual support, instead of non-sensical babbling. Cite a reference, quote an article, give me weight to your argument. You yourself have stated many times that you would never drive or try an imported car. Why should I care to respond to such a close-minded, forgive me, fool. You are becoming too much of a "wall" to me to even bother responding to, back your argument with fact, and then I will listen.

[turbo200]

I wonder if your girlfriend is good enough for you and if the next model that came along was just slightly better at something you would start riding her about all her faults ? Ya know mine aint the best cook but shes one damn good companion.

potato potato

[post="59330"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

but you made me laugh :lol: :lol: so I retract everything I said.....



okay maybe not

[siegen]

At the same time I just cant even remember a Toyota or Nissan from the 80's. I have a feeling they were exactly what you are bitching about GM over. FOrgettable.

But that's just you. I'm sure there are plenty of people who can list off a plethora of 70's or 80's imports that they love, but will scratch their head when they're asked for good 80's domestics.