turbo200

when I think of Buick or GMC, somehting like this comes to mind

completely agree bobo. and balthy, the vents were the first thing i thought of. I think the alfa interior in the g6 gtp would make that car a whole lot more desirable and fashionable. the next interior is not ergonomically perfect, the details are there, the materials and colors and form are more what I would like GM to pay attention to. It's just beautifully sculpted, and a car as great as the corvette deserves it

Interiors are one of the bigger determinants of perception. Someone gets in an interior that impresses them and they think they are in a car made to higher standards, or a more expensive car. In GM's case, the interiors are REALLY far behind the competition. It's a glaring ommission that really adds to the perception that there cars are inferior. That being said, the purpose of this thread is not to harp, but to introduce ideas for GM. What are the interior designs you really like from around the world? What interior themes do you feel are appropriate for each of GM's brands. In a perfect world, GM will have interiors that represent what each brand stands for, and the themes should be different, as they always have been. So what themes fit Pontiac, Buick, Chevy, Cadillac, Saturn, and Saab? Post some of your favorite interior pictures here. I'll start with an interior I think would be perfect for Pontiac's sport image: Pontiac's of the future should come with materials, colors, and quality no less than this Alfa presented above. It's beautiful, perfect for Pontiac. More to come later....

I've always believed Buick's natural position is that of entry-level luxury, so target Volvo, Acura, Lexus [lower, cozy models], etc, except with Buick's own identity of catering to those who want to be pampered with a powerful car, more than just sporting dynamics. Or a richer version of Chrysler's 300, imo, should be Buick's perfect target. In order to get there, and command prices on the level of 29-45k, interior design and materials still need to go a slight ways. Look to Volvo and Acura for inspiration; also the Enclave should have something more than worthy.

well, i think the point is it's not selling like the 300, which is incredible if it's still only taking 16 days to sell. i see why you'd say that, 36 days is still really great, and more than "respectable", but they're quoting an analyst there. as the title says, "it's not the 300", that's an even-handed comment. I don't detect bias there. I just think it's wonderful these cars are doing so well for Chrysler when they weren't even going to introduce a Charger. Little differentiation with a totally unique exterior and a solid platform to begin with =sales success.

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

yes, I agree. a lot of the materials are nice, and give you nice feelings for where GM is headed, but it's not a total piece yet. GM still has a ways to get there, and the design is marred by details that shouldn't be present in a Buick, like the cheap-looking black plastic on the sides of the HVAC and radio controls, like z28luver was saying.

Generally, I tend to believe Toyota doesn't usually set the sales chart on fire with their new entrants, even though they are highly competitive. Aside from the Corolla and Camry, they have a history of having many models that do well enough, but usually are overshadowed by the domestics. In the last year Toyota has had successes that have gone against that trend. Avalon, Scion TC, and Tacoma are all experiencing great sales in thier first years on the market. This is troubling and foreboding of their upcoming sales successes. That said, I hope the Yaris isn't a success, and could prove to not be one for the very reasons Petra posted. The Yaris may prove to be a very good car, which would end up making it worthy, but Toyota fans don't seem to be too interested in a very small car. Chevy fans like cheap cars, and so the Aveo does well. I don't see it doing much better than Aveo. Rav4 is currently selling 65k units. If the price is right around the Equinox I could see it doing real damage. The great thing is the exterior still prevents me from ever wanting to be seen driving one, which I think many agree with. The bad thing is they're damn good cars, which will convince many to overlook that glaring fact. The good thing is usually Toyota's are priced higher than the competition. Rav4 could easily sell 150k units, but at the cost of Highlander sales obviously. Camry is only ahead of last year's sales by 7k units; it's a solidly engineered car and will always have positive sales. I don't see it increasing to 500k units easily, especially with all the competition from the Fusions, Aura, redesined Accord, etc. As Petra mentioned, the accord hybrid is only adding around 1-2k units per month, and Honda actually recently put some incentive on it, yes it's minimal. I see people who normally would have opted for the V6 getting the hybrid instead. Given the campaign against hybrids in the media these days, I don't see a tremendous effect, like adding 70k sales. Yes I said against, note the increasing reports about hybrids not being worth the money, customers have become savvy about this, and hybrid consumers would be pretty savvy people to begin with. As much as the Tundra will assuredly be dominant, advertising will be everywhere and creative, and the proliferation of available configurations; I don't forsee it gaining 200k sales at the cost of the domestics. GM will have new trucks next year, and if they are styled right, they will be massive successes. GM's new interiors are finally worthy, the engines are better than anyone, with better fuel economy, and GM will have the numbers against Toyota, so hopefully they will be willing to flout that in head to head comparisons against Tundra. Silverado is GM's most important vehicle, I am confident they are readying heavy marketing for it. The style of it, will to me, be its most important factor for success. The current Chevy trucks still have attractive presences, but the bodies look straight out of the '90's. GM hopefully has made somehting with a little bit of flair, even the Tacoma's body has some lines to it, and is overall very modern looking. FJ might add 50k sales. It's a 4runner 5-seater right? It's meant for even more serious off-roading [like the 4-runner wasn't already well-known for this] with a very cool body. I can't see too many young guys going for it. This market is already stretched too thin, and Hummer's got it cornered. That is who they're going after in price? Hummer's exclusivity and image will have it over Toyota, and their design is better, imo. The Toyota is cool, but has a tinny feel to it completely absent in the Hummer.

agreed.

imo, STS isn't competitive because of a very poor quality interior in the most hotly contested market. GM wants to command some lofty prices for the STS, and it needs to have the perception that it is a total luxury piece. As it stands, it could use some Materials lovin' as well as a design freshening. The M45 way outshines the interior of the STS; in the rear seat controls alone the STS looks rental grade, whereas the M exudes class. The STS back seat is pretty tight, though I'm not totally sure how it compares within its class. It lacks the total moves, unless equipped with option packages that bump the price into the 60's. All in all, it's not a car that is completely baked, like the rest of GM's cars, imo. It's a decent car, but that's not good enough, especially in this segment.

Looking back at the products from a custgomer's point of view, this year's finanical performance was expected. GM's administration in 2000 is what led them to where they are now, so I would not say the company was in much better shape then than they are now. Fiscally, they were in a better position, but dynamically they were lost at sea. Finally, a binge of quick sell programs did nothing but destroy the little equity there was in GM vehicles.

this movie made 70 million this weekend; you can bet the sequel is already being scheduled for filming. I saw it yesterday, it's intensely beautiful, probably the most fun movie I've seen this year.

goblue, please feel free to search through buickman's posts to get an idea of the "drivel" evok was talking about. I've read each of buickman's posts at least ten times already, it gets very tiring after a while, especially when all the intelligent rebuttals in the world won't get him to change his tune.

ven, my definition of class competitive is still near the top of the segment, do you still agree with all your choices. i just want to make sure everyone is on the same page now. class competitive=near the top, or at the very top of the segment.

I guess it should mean class-leading products. In the other thread I mentioned class-leading. And I don't mean to discount the power of the Corvette, it's just that it's so widely recognized as an incredible automobile, and is the flagship, thereby excluding it from the list of competitive products. No, Croc, one extra car does not mean General Motors makes competitive vehicles, thanks for bringing that question up. The question is in general, so in general do they make competitive or class-leading products? if you just think one or two are, when they compete out of how many segments, well you get the gist. I haven't through all this, but so far I like the results. This is completely unscientific, and is just for fun purposes, and I'd love to hear as many opinions as possible. Do you feel they make class-leading products. And let's not resort to mud-slinging here. Let's respect other people's opinions and what they have to say on this front. Chruch Lady Out. LOL

Simple question, simple answer. I'm sorry I had to put the Corvette as an aside, but since it's, imo, there only class-leading product, I had to list the caveat. And, it is after all, the flagship, GM has to get it right. So share some opinions, give me your best, we're all fans, and we're all interested in the best for this company. EDIT: Sorry I wasn't more specific. This question should be, "In general do you think GM makes class-leading or competitive products." This should not include just a few entrants, consider the number of segments GM competes in, and consider how many are actually class-leading or very near the top of that segment [otherwise known as competitive].

The article you posted makes more sense to me than anything you've written so far from your own head. Let's examine this...."brutal competition", "failed to offer vehicles to contend foreign automakers", "loyalty to GM hurt me". Sounds like a recipe for disaster. Self-imposed disaster, self-imposed by the execs at GM, and the dealer for staying with GM, as much as I don't like saying that. But he's acknowledged the reasons for failure, how come you can't? And how come you can't recognize where the competition is at now, is far and away above where GM is at NOW. With the exception of the C6, all brands, including Cadillac, don't produce one SINGLE class-leading product. PATHETIC. . Hmmmmm.....new, competitive product :huh: You don't say? That helped the situation. By golly, that's a novel idea, let's release product people want for a change :rolleyes: I have thought about this for a long time now, since this thread began. This is the BEST GM Fan site, imo, where no one is willing to hold back thier opinion, and people have such an unbiased perspective that they are willing to positively critique competitors' cars. We're all just generally interested in the financial well-being of this company. That said, here is my resolution to this thread. I will post a poll, which will hopefully garner votes and interest, and ask GM FANS WHAT THEY REALLY THINK ABOUT GM CARS. Let's go. Keep in mind, we are FANS, and we want the best, despite what some here propagate.

I know I'm not the only one unimpressed by GM's decision to wait till 2005 to increase product spending by 1 billion. I know the upcoming times at GM are looking good, but I can't help but complain in my mind about the times that came before this, and what could have been done to avoid all this. Wagoner went through this once before in 1992. Certainly, there had to be lessons learned there, there had to be a catalyst for money-making years again. I just don't understand how it could taka so long to figure out a formula that seems so easy to crack, to me at least. Give the customer what they want. What do they want? Classy, high quality products that set standards for driveability, but first and foremost are fun and desirable to own. Give us what we want. Good cars that make us feel good to be in them and be seen in them. I just don't get, and never will understand, why it has taken so long to understand that. And I will never understand the conservative policies the blue suits at all companies have on design and styling. Wasn't there somehting called the Design Golden Age where everybody fanaticized over cars? Wasn't GM the king of this era, producing cars people today covet and spend millions to own and restore. What's so hard to understand about people liking good design?

I can coordinate that. And then at the end of the week I could write up a review of the facts the insiders shared with us that week. The Weekly Insider Review. On another note: BEST THREAD EVER! I don't have time to comment but a big :cheers: :CG_all: :bowdown: for the wealth of information. And to ah-ha for saying RWD Medium is getting more programs. :cheers: :cheers: :wub: I think that's what someone else here meant when they said I'd be very happy.

that's a damn good point reg. the japanese build engines that last ALL the time, this engine should be congratulated for being able to achieve the same, but it is no noteworthy achievement, being a GM is no excuse. fly is right, this is a very circuitous argument. the 3800 is a workhorse engine that endured for many years with advancements, but it has since been outclassed by the competition and cannot match the free breathing techniques of multi-valve engines as well as thier overall quietness and sophisticated sounds. You ever hear those GM's that make the loud knocking sounds? Hell, I've driven in several recent W's with the 3.8 or some other derivative that sound so bad, as if I was in some taxi cab with 400k miles on it, when in reality the car only has 74k miles. Anyways, salute to fans of it, but you have to get over it, thankfully it's being put to pasture.

more threads where insiders take up a whole page conversing need to happen

next time on C&G TV: lunch with the insiders

One more thing, did you mean to include a search of your posts at the bottom of your post?

Hogan, thanks again for the update. Though I would love to see Zeta pulled ahead, I would not like to see it at the expense of another important car. GM needs to do what they can to get the Malibu out on time. Does the Epsilon chassis not perform up to par of the competition as is? Will it be handily outclassed in a few years. I know G6 doesn't handle all that well compared to some of the competition. Bottom line is, if GM can update Epsilon to up the ante in the handling and dynamics department, bring Malibu, the design, into this century, and get rid of the rental stigma, then let's do it as fast as we can. GM needs as many competitive entrants in the midsize arena, and Aura and Malibu need to make up for lost time, just like Zeta needs to be here now too.

a new viper so soon? is there a legit source, or is some kid just making up a story