Detroit's Pony Car Dilemma

[Ghost Dog]

http://www.forbes.com/2006/02/06/ford-must..._0207flint.html

Yes, there was wild applause for all three. Muscle cars are the darlings of the car magazine writers and the "boy racer" crowd,

That is fine, but it does not necessarily mean lots of business. Pontiac's new GTO, actually built in Australia, has been a disappointment--only 11,590 sales last year.

How practical are these cars from a business standpoint?

Would it be better to concentrate the money and manpower to develop stylish mass-market sedans and other practical vehicles to battle the challenge of Toyota (nyse: TM - news  - people ), Honda (nyse: HMC - news  - people ) and Hyundai? General Motors killed the Camaro with the 2002 model, shut the factory and let the workers go. Now they think they should bring it back.

These are all tough decisions. Detroit needs excitement to meet the foreign challenge. Toyota, for example, doesn't sell special muscle cars but put lots of muscle in its ordinary cars. That new Camry family sedan coming this spring, for example, will offer a 268 horsepower, six-cylinder engine.

That old muscle car era had its downside. When you put in bigger engines, other parts--such as radiators and frames--get bigger and heavier. The overall costs go up, and some of the lightness and simple fun can get lost.

I also wonder about the size of the market for such cars. Ford considers the new Mustang a success, but the original Mustang sold 400,000-plus cars in its first 12 months in 1964-65. If GM and Chrysler jump into this business, are there a quarter of a million buyers for such vehicles? Or will the three companies have to fight over a universe of 161,000 potential customers?

Going back to the future is not without risk.

[-Camaro-]

The GTO didn't do well, because it was always limited production, the styling was average to bad, and it was too expensive!

[Sixty8panther]

How about a nice hot cup of $hut the f#ck up!?

(just so there's no confusion I was talking to the Author of the article, NOT anyone on C&G)

Edited February 9, 2006 by Sixty8panther

[ehaase]

I share Flint's concerns about more pony cars. The 2005 Mustang really does not sell much better than the Mustang did when it was restyled for 1994 and 1999. The Mustang did well for 2005, but sales will probably gradually drop over the next few years, as is normal for sports coupes. I don't think that there is a big market for a new Camaro and Challenger, even though I am the only person here who feels this way. I don't think that this is a growing market. At least the Challenger is about the same size and shares most of its components with the 300. For the Camaro to succeed, it must share many components with high volume sedans. Hopefully the Camaro could sell 150,000 per year, but it needs to be profitable if sales were only 60,000 per year.

[Croc]

How about a nice hot cup of $hut the f#ck up!?

Thanks for yet another meaningful comment. Yes I'm being sarcastic.

[Croc]

I can see where Flint is coming from. I think GM should compete in the segment, but it is the extent of which that I am cautious on...GM needs more models for economies-of-scale, but they can't all be ponycars too or else they will just cannibalize sales.

[turbo200]

It is best the way GM is doing it. By concentrating on building a flexible platform that can build the exciting Camaro as well as others and even crossovers that that can help to build volume and ensure the future of certain brands.

It's equally important to build world-class, stylish sedans. Look how many times that line has been fed to GM, and only now will they be releasing something akin to it [Aura].

[Newbiewar]

its not really the car itself, its the pricipal of the thing...

if one artist helps design a car that people around the world are excited about, what are they going to do when they get to design the mainstream vehicles?

what about the company as a whole... when some good press comes of a model that you help make, wouldnt you put more pride into future models...

so even if the camaro only sells 100k a year, will we have exciting impalas and malibus and cobalts to follow, i bet so...

look at how much attention the C6 got, now look we are getting a camaro? what will be next a rwd imapla? ... i must be hollucinating

[pow]

its not really the car itself, its the pricipal of the thing...

if one artist helps design a car that people around the world are excited about, what are they going to do when they get to design the mainstream vehicles?

what about the company as a whole... when some good press comes of a model that you help make, wouldnt you put more pride into future models...

so even if the camaro only sells 100k a year, will we have exciting impalas and malibus and cobalts to follow, i bet so...

look at how much attention the C6 got, now look we are getting a camaro?  what will be next a rwd imapla? ... i must be hollucinating

Yep, the Camaro (and the Corvette, SSR, GTO, Solstice, SKY, XLR...) is more of an image-building thing. Obviously the public won't switch from the millions of practical cars they buy each year, but hopefully it will make buying a Cobalt or Impala a cooler thing to do.

[cmattson]

I can see where Flint is coming from, but I'm not going to lose sleep over it.

First point of contention:

Toyota, for example, doesn't sell special muscle cars but put lots of muscle in its ordinary cars. That new Camry family sedan coming this spring, for example, will offer a 268 horsepower, six-cylinder engine.

Gee, it's not like GM hasn't had a 280hp Grand Prix gracing the showrooms for a number of years now, or a 303hp Impala this year. Apparently it's only newsworthy/noteworthy when a Asian make does it. See the Ridgeline's "innovative" dual-hinge tailgate for more details...

Now, back to Flint's main point. I don't think that GM's going to build/design an entire platform for just the Camaro. GM's too focused on cutting core costs to pull something that foolheartedly. I think GM can build an affordable series of RWD platformed vehicles - with the appropriate reduction in FWD vehicles. Take the LaCrosse (really, I mean it -> take it) and replace it with a RWD lux sedan. Now you've given Buick some segmentation between the LaCrosse and the Lucerne! The GTO could go to this new platform, but it would seem like (yet another) Pontiac-rebadge-of-a-Chevrolet.. so I'd be hesitant to do this..? The GTO served it's purpose: it held it's own as an affordable, RWD coupe until the Camaro got to market. Let it retire already; besides wouldn't it just directly compete against the Camaro? Why engineer/develop/build a competitor to your own entrant? Seems like a waste of money. If the RWD platform was flexible enough, you could move the Impala to it as a mid-size sedan RWD. That would make a total of 3 North American vehicles: a Buick sedan, a Chevrolet Camaro, a Chevrolet Impala sedan. That would seem adequate for cost-sharing. If you wanted to water it down one step further, you could make a G8 sedan for Pontiac, but I'd think you just be stealing sales from the Impala.. so why bother. Additionally, you could continue Saturn's conquest-sales strategy and then Saturn could get a coupe or sedan. The difference here is that Saturn's target audience is conquest (I'd never buy a domestic vehicle) crowd.. who are somewhat ignorant to the fact that GM owns Saturn. Those people would never bother looking on a Chevrolet/Buick/Pontiac sales lot -- so giving Saturn one wouldn't exactly cannibalize other brand sales.

[Ghost Dog]

I would say SSR,GTO,and XLR did very little for GM

[razoredge]

So long as its a usefull platform they can build Buick a flagship from as well as something for Pontiac, then it does not matter how many Camaros sell, it matters how many total sales of that platform are made.

UNLIKE KAPPA

UNLIKE CADILLAC

I believe the concern is legitimate, we can only look back and remember how sales of 2dr cars fell and how sales of American "sports" cars fell. People are more into utility today than sports cars, unlike the glory days of the Camaro and Mustang. Thats why this platform must be versatile. Then let the divisions personalize and tune the cars according to the target.

So nice to here them tootin the Toyo horn for 268 ponys..........did they do that for the GP when it got 260 ponys two years ago ? How about now when its up to 300 ponys ? Ah..never mind

[pow]

I can see where Flint is coming from, but I'm not going to lose sleep over it.

First point of contention:

Toyota, for example, doesn't sell special muscle cars but put lots of muscle in its ordinary cars. That new Camry family sedan coming this spring, for example, will offer a 268 horsepower, six-cylinder engine.

Gee, it's not like GM hasn't had a 280hp Grand Prix gracing the showrooms for a number of years now, or a 303hp Impala this year. Apparently it's only newsworthy/noteworthy when a Asian make does it. See the Ridgeline's "innovative" dual-hinge tailgate for more details...

Pontiac and Chevy do sell "special muscle cars", though. And the 303hp and 260hp engines are only found in special sporting versions of ordinary Impalas and Grand Prixs.

[turbo200]

I would say SSR,GTO,and XLR did very little for GM

GTO and XLR seem to be building positive image. GTO is the only car worth considering to many over at Pontiac....I see one every couple of weeks here in LA, which compared to the ratio of normal Pontiacs I see is astonishing in light of its sales. XLR V will build up image as well, though XLR could use an update soon, like in two to three years.

[Jazzhead]

Of course GM should compete in the segment. It's a unique segment, that the domestics own (practically) to themselves. The whole idea is to reflect classic Motown design and performance cues. The Mustang is a huge hit, and so is the 300. Toyota will play the game too, with the FJ Cruiser.

Yes, GM must compete in the broad and bland middle market, but it should press its advantages - its image cars should scream "American". The Corvette does. The GTO, unfortunately, doesn't. It is fine for what it is - a Holden - and sells about as many copies as, say, a comparable Saab would. But there's nothing unsound with placing a business bet on a new Camaro, or a larger sedan with distinctly American design cues. The CTS is American, but the Lucerne could, with a different grille, pass for a Nissan. The new Aura (which I like) is not that discernable from a top quality European sedan. I guess that's the point, and GM's big enough (hint - that's why it pays to keep all its brands) to sell different images to different customers. But I don't wanna drive rice, or a car that looks like I do. The CTS and Mustang and 300 and Charger are the kinds of rides I want - and I'll bet Jerry Flint would be surprised at how successful GM, or Ford, would be if they embraced their heritage without apology. Designed here. Built here. That's what I want.

[balthazar]

>>"That old muscle car era had its downside. When you put in bigger engines, other parts--such as radiators and frames--get bigger and heavier. The overall costs go up, and some of the lightness and simple fun can get lost.

"<<

Yeah: that 175-HP I-6 Tempest sure had an S-load of 'lightness & simple fun' that was lost when the 425-HP GTO Judge came along. What a stupid move to give a car more power & flash! That'll never work...

[mustang84]

These are all tough decisions. Detroit needs excitement to meet the foreign challenge. Toyota, for example, doesn't sell special muscle cars but put lots of muscle in its ordinary cars. That new Camry family sedan coming this spring, for example, will offer a 268 horsepower, six-cylinder engine.

It's just too bad that Toyota's "cars with muscle" are about as fun to look at as a still life painting of a bowl of fruit.

[Newbiewar]

Toyota doesnt know muscle...

my parents toyota camary v6 with 194 hp seems as sluggish as a 142 hp HHR... or cobalt...

Toyota's transmissions suck all the power out of their engines... either that or thier engines are over rated.

[Sixty8panther]

Mustang:

C'mon buddy that bowl of fruit is MUCH more exciting than any Toyota this side of the TT Supra.

With this pissy, negative anti-anything-non-bread-n-butter attitude Chrysler might not exist today. Look at that company before and after the Viper of the early 90s.

And this idiot suggests what?

Leave the market to the Challenger and Mustang?

With that kind of attitude GM might as well close the doors and pack it up. Any other crowded market segmants GM should not venture into? Perhaps Cadillac is crowding the luxury car segment. We should kill that division before they hurt Lexus and Acura sales.

"...GM needs more models for economies-of-scale, but they can't all be ponycars..."

Well let's take a look at this argument:

Bread-n-butter 4-door, FWD, 4/6 cyliner seadns/hatchbacks:

- Aveo

- Cobalt

- Malibu

- Impala

- Ion

- L200/L300

- Vibe

- G6

- Grand Prix

- Bonneville

- Lucerne

- Lacrosse

Did I miss any? Now let's take a look at this crowded Muscle car segment that GM is over-investing into:

- GTO (and even that's a stretch... the GTO is not a Ponycar)

[Satty]

Lets see...

Competative GM bread-n-Butter 4/6cyl Sedans/hatchbacks

-

-

-

-*crickets chirping*

Yeah, without any real competition in this segment there is no GM to produce a pony car.

[Sixty8panther]

Call me stupid but I could have sworn that I just saw a Chevrolet ad saying they're the No. 1 in car sales in the No. American market. WTF else do they need to do to be considered "competative"?

Next question.

[PontiacTechNJ]

>>"That old muscle car era had its downside. When you put in bigger engines, other parts--such as radiators and frames--get bigger and heavier. The overall costs go up, and some of the lightness and simple fun can get lost.

"<<

Yeah: that 175-HP I-6 Tempest sure had an S-load of 'lightness & simple fun' that was lost when the 425-HP GTO Judge came along. What a stupid move to give a car more power & flash! That'll never work...

when did a GTO ever have 425 hp ?

[cmattson]

Pontiac and Chevy do sell "special muscle cars", though. And the 303hp and 260hp engines are only found in special sporting versions of ordinary Impalas and Grand Prixs.

The '07 Camry will have a 2.4l, a 192-hp 3.0l, and the new 268hp engine.. so how is that different from an Impala/Grand Prix? If GM wants to provide their hot engine in a package that gives you a sportier suspension, bigger tires, etc (& presumably command a higher price accordingly), then who can fault them? Every car manufacturer packages their vehicles differently.

[Snate]

If you don't want the big V-6 in the Camry, you are stuck with the anemic 4 cyl. At least with GM, the base engine doesn't suck.

[toyoguy]

this is an easy task for Dodge, but a costly proposition for GM, unless they use the platform for other vehicles. GM really has no other choice but to build it anyways.

[cmattson]

According to Edmunds, the Camry will still have the 192hp 3.0l V6:

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Autos...rticleId=108838

[Snate]

According to Edmunds, the Camry will still have the 192hp 3.0l V6:

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Autos...rticleId=108838

I don't think so. The hybrid is rated at 192 hp...looks like thats what they are saying.

[Satty]

Call me stupid but I could have sworn that I just saw a Chevrolet ad saying they're the No. 1 in car sales in the No. American market. WTF else do they need to do to be considered "competative"?

Next question.

Well, I wouldn't call being the #1 seller of fleet cars to be ultra competative.

[regfootball]

Toyota doesnt know muscle...

my parents toyota camary v6 with 194 hp seems as sluggish as a 142 hp HHR... or cobalt...

Toyota's transmissions suck all the power out of their engines... either that or thier engines are over rated.

no, just sludged up

[cmattson]

I don't think so.  The hybrid is rated at 192 hp...looks like thats what they are saying.

Oops.. my bad.. looks like I misread. My sincerest apologies!

[regfootball]

i do think GM should have a Camaro for image and to round out the product mix, but honestly they should only expect to do it in a smaller volume like 50-80 thousand units a year. So whatever they build for the Camaro has to be a shared platform, plain and simple. Its really the same as to how Nissan can justify building a Z car or G35 coupe.

If GM wants to be considered a top manufacturer than there is no excuse to them not being able to do so financially. If the market is there, the management and beancounters have to figure out how to get it done and done well. Honestly, fire them all if they can't. Bring in someone who can.

I am a fan of the current GTO but do admit its not at all in the vein of the typical mullet/redneck/gold chain style musclecar or last Camaro. What i like about the current GTO is its sleek styling (assuming it has some aggressive add on features), its awesome interior, and the general aura of being more of a euro style coupe. Someone can legitmately buy a GTO after considering a 3 series coupe and not get laughed at. You can call the cars comparable in a lot of ways. It should have been 5-7 grand cheaper, the gas tank should not have compromised out all the trunk space, and it should have had a moonroof and stuff available though.

Saturn really needn't have any RWD cars other than the Sky. Saturn will compare best to Honda, Toyo, VW and such by having FWD or FWD/AWD cars. End of that discussion.

So Chevy could stand to have a RWD large sedan, A Caprice or Impala if you will and the camaro. Pontiac should have a RWD based sedan (or 2) w/ AWD option. Buick should have one example of Impala/Caprice version of the RWD sedan, with AWD available. Pontiac should have a GTO successor, again in the vein of the 3 series type of coupe, at a lesser price of course. We don't need a Pontiac coupe to be the same type of car as a Camaro. I don't think Buick needs a RWD coupe unless maybe its a convertible.

But certainly i think if they can develop a platform that's usable for all that stuff, it should be doable. They could easily get 200,000 units ayear out of all those models.

Again, look at how diverse Nissan can make their platforms pay off, yet the cars are not really clones and they can work in the AWD options to them

-G35, G35 coupe, 350z, is the M also on this chassis?

-Altima, maxima, Quest.

-Frontier, Titan, pathfinder, Xterra

What i sense here is the typical GM doing the 'how cheap of a system can we design and just get by' vs. designing a great set of components and then agreeing to it and and then working smartly to find the sweet spot between cost to build and value delivered to the customer.

But GM consistenly builds their mainstream cars to the lowest common denominator in a lot of ways so why would we expect anything else? What they are confronting is the notion of being forced to build the good stuff, which pains them to even try doing at mid market prices. i can see the lips curling on the exec's and beancounters faces now.

Another thing, no beam axle crap. IRS please.

Edited February 9, 2006 by regfootball

[z28luvr01]

Again, look at how diverse Nissan can make their platforms pay off, yet the cars are not really clones and they can work in the AWD options to them

-G35, G35 coupe, 350z, is the M also on this chassis?

-Altima, maxima, Quest.

-Frontier, Titan, pathfinder, Xterra.

Don't forget the Murano...it's on the same platform as Alt/Max/Quest.

GM really needs to consolidate their platforms. With all this talk about "architectures", they still have too many. For RWD, they have Kappa, Global RWD (Holden VE), Sigma, and Y-body. There's no reason why they can't cut that list in half, if not combine all those into on. The same thing exists on the FWD side -they have Delta, Epsilon, G, W (on the way out), Theta, and, soon, Lambda.

[Sixty8panther]

Well, I wouldn't call being the #1 seller of fleet cars to be ultra competative.

*Sigh* always a loophole with you... Why are you so hell bent on snowballing Toyotas products while raggin' on GM constantly?

Z28LUVR:

You're absolutely right. There should be four RWD architectures and yet like 12 cars off those four.

Vette/XLR

Kappa (expand the range)

Sigma Cadillac and a Buick or two

"Zeta Light" coupes, sedans & wagons for Chevy, Pontiac & Buick.

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

I know coupes are not a big market these days, but I keep reading at times that with the GTO to be green-lighted possibly for a next generation, there is claimed to be no room for a companion Firebird. If a GTO is still priced in the $33,000+ range, and a Firebird in the say-$21-22,000 range to start (figure Camaro like $1,500-2,000 less for equipment differences, etc.), then what's the problem?

[Cory Wolfe]

*Sigh* always a loophole with you...    Why are you so hell bent on snowballing Toyotas products while raggin' on GM constantly? 

Sixty8... You can't possibly think being #1 in sales makes any vehicle competitive, can you? That is completely retarded. First off, you really must factor in fleet sales. I think doing that would show how Chevy really sells. Second, that's just really retarded. Sales do not equal better, competitive. You are just so out of touch here... that it's extremely hilarious. I'm glad someone like you isn't in charge of GM. The company would have been run into the ground by now...

[Snate]

You can't possibly think being #1 in sales makes any vehicle competitive, can you? That is completely retarded.

Seems to work for the Camry...not that I agree with the notion

[regfootball]

if there is a camaro there is no need for a firebird, unless its a rebadge...which yall dont want.

pontiac cannot afford to go any other way anymore besides 'sophisticated performance'. Let chevy have the musclecar. Let pontiac get the sophisticated GT car like it has now (GTO).

[enzl]

Sixty8... You can't possibly think being #1 in sales makes any vehicle competitive, can you? That is completely retarded. First off, you really must factor in fleet sales. I think doing that would show how Chevy really sells. Second, that's just really retarded. Sales do not equal better, competitive. You are just so out of touch here... that it's extremely hilarious. I'm glad someone like you isn't in charge of GM. The company would have been run into the ground by now...

Shhhh....you're not allowed to criticize GM here, didn't you read the sign?

In all seriousness, since when does 'best selling', in any field, immediately imply 'best'.

McDonald's sells more hamburgers than anyone. Are they the best burgers out there?

The problem that the apologists on this site have is that they're too busy justifying and excusing....they see constructive criticism as a negative.

I find it hard to believe that with 9 million sales worldwide, GM can't muster the effort to produce a quality RWD platform that can be sold for below $30,000, other than the brand new Kappas (which they can't produce in a quantity large enough to become a mass market vehicle). If you think about it for a minute, they've had 30+ years to identify the 3 series as a target to shoot for. Hell, BMW has used the same component set to produce the 1-series at a profit...It's incompetence at the highest levels and, to me, inexcusable....

[-Camaro-]

I keep reading that people are saying the market will be too crowded with a camaro/challenger, but if they build the car right and make it attractive, it'll create NEW market...

[regfootball]

honestly too, anyone who thinks a v8 camaro will hit market at less than 30k is stupid. STUPID. STUPID.

clues

1- the GTO was not close to 30k

2- look at the Magnums and chargers with v8's...try to find ONE on a lot somewhere under 30 grand.

3- an Impala SS with a small block stickers mostly over 30g.

4- most GTP G6's you find on lots are at 28,29 grand

your camaro v8 for under 30g with any options is a PIPE DREAM

[-Camaro-]

honestly too, anyone who thinks a v8 camaro will hit market at less than 30k is stupid.  STUPID.  STUPID.

clues

1- the GTO was not close to 30k

2- look at the Magnums and chargers with v8's...try to find ONE on a lot somewhere under 30 grand.

3- an Impala SS with a small block stickers mostly over 30g.

4- most GTP G6's you find on lots are at 28,29 grand

your camaro v8 for under 30g with any options is a PIPE DREAM

Then it will fail. If they can't make it cheap, they might as well not make it.

[Snate]

honestly too, anyone who thinks a v8 camaro will hit market at less than 30k is stupid.  STUPID.  STUPID.

clues

1- the GTO was not close to 30k

2- look at the Magnums and chargers with v8's...try to find ONE on a lot somewhere under 30 grand.

3- an Impala SS with a small block stickers mostly over 30g.

4- most GTP G6's you find on lots are at 28,29 grand

your camaro v8 for under 30g with any options is a PIPE DREAM

I think you can get the Mustang V8 for like 25K or something....but that has much higher sales due to the Librarian V6 model.

[balthazar]

when did a GTO ever have 425 hp ?

Widely-accepted actual output of the RA IV.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

From a production standpoint, the Challenger might be easier to pull off than a new Camaro. Chrysler based the Challenger on underpinnings that it would share with the rear-wheel-drive Dodge Magnum and Charger and the Chrysler 300. The plant that builds the current models is currently on three shifts, meaning 300,000 per year production. A low-volume model like that Challenger could keep the lines running full if there is a slowdown in demand for the other models. Chrysler is not facing the risk or investment that GM would be making.

And how i this different from GM again?!?!?

GM will have 3 volume models (The affore mentioned Pontiac, Buick and Chevrolet) Which, BTW from what I've heard, have NOT been officially greenlighted.

Oh, and... We all know why the GTO is not selling as well as it could be and it isn't because the market isn't there. It's not a failure either, just not what it should've been.

These are all tough decisions. Detroit needs excitement to meet the foreign challenge. Toyota, for example, doesn't sell special muscle cars but put lots of muscle in its ordinary cars. That new Camry family sedan coming this spring, for example, will offer a 268 horsepower, six-cylinder engine.

Umm... Okay... Heard of the 303 hp Impala SS and Grand Prix GXP by chance there Flint?

I also wonder about the size of the market for such cars. Ford considers the new Mustang a success, but the original Mustang sold 400,000-plus cars in its first 12 months in 1964-65.

Ummm, yeah.. The market changes over time.

If GM and Chrysler jump into this business, are there a quarter of a million buyers for such vehicles? Or will the three companies have to fight over a universe of 161,000 potential customers?

It wouldn't be any more cut throat than the rest of the industry.. I'm sick of these 'journalists' who think GM and the other big whatevers should just give up and back peddle... Well, let's reduce production... Let's phase out a division... Let's not make this car or that truck... You know you'll never succeed anyway. That's the PROBLEM with Detroit, they don't TRY HARD ENOUGH.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Well, I wouldn't call being the #1 seller of fleet cars to be ultra competative.

LOL... Yep, because that's ALL they sell... And, after all Toyota doesn't sell ANY cars to fleets now do they?

You ask for competitive mid sizers.

Impala (Probably the best)

Lacrosse (Not a bad car)

Grand Prix GXP

G6 (Plenty of people seem to like it, especially YOUNG people)

Aura ('nuff said)

As far as them toting the Toyota horn.... It's par for the course, for they are god afterall.

Sixty8... You can't possibly think being #1 in sales makes any vehicle competitive, can you? That is completely retarded.

Oh is it now?!?!?! then why are the headlines hyping Toyota as the best car company because of their sales and surpassing GM.

Sales=success, THAT's what we're in business for.

First off, you really must factor in fleet sales. I think doing that would show how Chevy really sells.

I just love naive import lovers... No matter WHAT GM does, they're never 'good enough' or 'successful' eventhough in reality, they're the most successful automaker known to man. then these import lovers like to come on GM boards and tell us how we're "completely retarded" for expressing our opinions on subjective measures anyway.

Second, that's just really retarded. Sales do not equal better, competitive.

Yes they do... By in large sales success=more money=better. the only reason that isn't evident with Detroit right now is because of their fixed costs.

The company would have been run into the ground by now...

Which is different from the reality of the situation in what way?

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

if there is a camaro there is no need for a firebird, unless its a rebadge...which yall dont want.

pontiac cannot afford to go any other way anymore besides 'sophisticated performance'.  Let chevy have the musclecar.  Let pontiac get the sophisticated GT car like it has now (GTO).

Agreed 100%

Shhhh....you're not allowed to criticize GM here, didn't you read the sign?

Actually, we'd prefer that you not directly criticize other members here. But, your right, it's probably not wise to criticize GM repeatedly either.

In all seriousness, since when does 'best selling', in any field, immediately imply 'best'.

BEST has always been a measurement for success and sales=success. But I can see your point; I mean, after all Toyota's cars certainly aren't always the BEST or most competitive in their classes but they sell very well.

McDonald's sells more hamburgers than anyone. Are they the best burgers out there?

Nope, but are they the BEST at what they do and subsequently the most successful? Absolutely.

The problem that the apologists on this site have is that they're too busy justifying and excusing....they see constructive criticism as a negative.

Yeah, because I'VE never been critical of GM or anything... And most of the one-liner-criticism pushed at GM here ISN'T constructive, it's just said to piss people like me and 68 off because we're actually individuals who don't chant along with the rest of the crowd.

I find it hard to believe that with 9 million sales worldwide, GM can't muster the effort to produce a quality RWD platform that can be sold for below $30,000, other than the brand new Kappas (which they can't produce in a quantity large enough to become a mass market vehicle). If you think about it for a minute, they've had 30+ years to identify the 3 series as a target to shoot for.

I think they pegged the 3 series fine wth the CTS and GTO.

But, I agree to an extent... GM seems to mismanage it's resources badly... Kappa is an excellent example. They had the opportunity of a lifetime and relegated it to a niche.

[razoredge]

[regfootball]

I think you can get the Mustang V8 for like 25K or something....but that has much higher sales due to the Librarian V6 model.

GM's pricing history is too obvious to think that they would price a v8 maro for under 30. If the FWD Impala SS and GP GXP is 30-34k, no way the Camaro is under 30. At a minimum the Camaro would price out about the same the Monte Carlo line. And monte's don't sticker cheap.

No way the Camaro undercuts the Magnum and Charger. And hemi versions of those are at least 30k on the lots and most often closer to 35k.

that's why I keep saying....don't wait......it will cost you more.....find a nice used Vette now or a nice used CTSv or a nice GTO......

Edited February 10, 2006 by regfootball

[Satty]

Holy crap, you're all completely not reading what I said. GM needs great midsizers/mainstreamers, which they currently lack. The Malibu and Impala are better than they were two years ago, but still cannot sell in close-to-Camry numbers without huge discounts or going to fleets. Volume doesn't equal profit. They need mainstream cars that aren't a notch or two below the competition, which EVERY midsize GM is selling right now is. As much as you all hate the Camry, it sells with low incentives (only recently have I seen them advertised with more than $1000 on the hood) and half of its volume doesn't go to fleets. Facts, live with them.

[Cory Wolfe]

Oh is it now?!?!?! then why are the headlines hyping Toyota as the best car company because of their sales and surpassing GM.

You of all people know that the media is corrupted. Don't suddenly use that as an excuse for why sales=competitive. It doesn't and any person with a drop of objectivity should know that.

Sales=success, THAT's what we're in business for.

We're talking about sales equalling competitiveness, not success. Uncompetitive cars can be successful, but that's not justification to make a car uncompetitive. That's just retarded. Take that any way you want but GM cannot continue to get by making uncompetitive cars. Obviously, GM realizes that too. Look at the upcoming Aura, the Enclave concept, the new Tahoe... All thoroughly competitive. Well, the Aura and Enclave should be going by the concepts...

I just love naive import lovers... No matter WHAT GM does, they're never 'good enough' or 'successful' eventhough in reality, they're the most successful automaker known to man. then these import lovers like to come on GM boards and tell us how we're "completely retarded" for expressing our opinions on subjective measures anyway.

Do you forget who the hell your talking to? It's me, BV. Remember now? Yeah, I like Imports. It's no secret but I originally came here as a GM fan. Yeah, GM annoys me sometimes and only really like them for Pontiac. Still, I'm in the middle. I don't have much against imports or domestics, I just like what I like and I call it like I see it. I won't give slack to any manufacturer for doing something I'm not a fan of. I especially won't deny something that's deserved.

Now, do me a favor and never come at me like that again. I've never said anything against you and I respect you. I wasn't calling you or Sixty8 "completely retarded". The logic in what he was saying? Yes, but not him. Got it?

However, what I said was true. Factor in the f@#king fleet sales! I garantee you that Chevy will not be the best selling car brand after doing so. Especially when somewhere around half of Impalas and Malibus go to fleets.

Yes they do... By in large sales success=more money=better. the only reason that isn't evident with Detroit right now is because of their fixed costs.

Again, I said nothing about success or money. I'm strictly talking about the cars themselves and whether they are competitive or not. In case you forgot, competitive means to be as good or better than the car it is competing with. In this way, most of GM's midsizers are uncompetitive. Don't like it? Yell at GM, not me. I'm just calling it like I see it, as I said.

Which is different from the reality of the situation in what way?

Um... what? I said using the logic Sixty8 displayed in his post would surely run GM into the ground had he been in charge. Looking at what's happening at GM now, they don't use that logic. They realize they have to make vehicles that are as good or better than the competition and will finally starting to put out competitive products.

Actually, we'd prefer that you not directly criticize other members here. But, your right, it's probably not wise to criticize GM repeatedly either.

But it's okay for you to criticize me and foreign brands?

BEST has always been a measurement for success and sales=success. But I can see your point; I mean, after all Toyota's cars certainly aren't always the BEST or most competitive in their classes but they sell very well.

Ding, ding, ding! That's my point. Sales do not equal the best vehicle, as shown by Toyota and *gasp* GM.

Yeah, because I'VE never been critical of GM or anything... And most of the one-liner-criticism pushed at GM here ISN'T constructive, it's just said to piss people like me and 68 off because we're actually individuals who don't chant along with the rest of the crowd.

Really? Its just to piss people like you and Sixty8 off... Huh... I would have thought it was to make GM a better company. Guess not... If that isn't a conspiracy theory if I ever saw one...

Edited February 10, 2006 by blackviper8891