Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

GM News, New Models and Market Share



  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited January 2013
    I, personally, don't get hung up on 'topic drift' or a razor-straight interpretation of a topic. Frankly, other makes get mentioned here all the time. If it's good, it's mentioned here...if not so good, and in the context of other vehicles, it's OK to post here too. I don't think anybody's head is going to spin around because a negative post about Honda is posted here.

    How 'bout this: Honda had a very large recall today. GM had none today.
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,325
    I don't mind Honda getting bashed. Frankly, lately (the last few years) they've deserved it.

    I think the transmission problem is overblown though, as most Accords are sold with 4 cylinder engines, and those had no issues. I'm sure Chrysler's historical transmission failure rate makes Honda's look modest in comparison.

    The first good things I've seen from Honda since 2002 are the 2013 Civic and Accord new models.

    It looks like they are getting back on track with those.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    The Monza debuted in the spring of 1960 and for the time, it was considered to be a "sporty," as opposed to a "sports," car.

    According to Wiki, the early Corvair line "competed with imported cars such as the original Volkswagen Beetle, as well as the Ford Falcon and the Plymouth Valiant, new entries in a market segment that was established in the U.S. by the Nash[1] and Rambler American."

    By no stretch of the imagination can anybody consider that the Beetle, Falcon, Valiant, Nash or Rambler were sports or sporty cars. Corvair offerings were 4-door, 2-door, station wagon, van and a convertible.

    In contrast, the roots of the production 1964.5 Ford Mustang was the mid-engine, 2-seat roadster. A sports car. Thus, Mustang genealogy as a sports car, the Corvair an economy car.

    Ford executives no doubt realized a new untapped market segment of sports or sporty cars and thus the development of the prototype Mustang I in 1961 and a working model driven at the U.S. Grand Prix in 1962. They discarded the mid-engine two seater as a production idea due to probable very limited buyer interest in this configuration. The front engine, rear drive, 4 passenger configuration was chosen for production due to parts availability and simplicity of engineering and likely broad appeal. Not a rear engine, rear drive as on Corvair. Ford's design decision was a home run. The Corvair design, in the long history of GM, has to be considered a flop. It was never repeated again by GM till this day in 2013.

    The first Mustang design is completely different from the Corvair design. Corvair did not influence the Mustang. Not in design, nor marketting.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    Corvair did not influence the Mustang. Not in design, nor marketting.

    Do you know who Hal Sperlich and Lee Iacocca are? They are the two guys most responsible for the Mustang as we know it. And they say they were influenced by the Corvair Monza.

    I don't know how else to say it.
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,325
    I'm going to have to 100% agree with Xrunner2 here, and categorically state all you others are 100% wrong.

    First, quoting or relying on former Big 3 Auto Execs is like quoting or relying upon data from nitwits, retards, and other mentally challenged individuals. The Big 3 auto execs are about as incompetent a group as has ever been in place in corporate America. Wait, no, I take that back, they are the most incompetent.

    Big 3 auto executives don't know or understand the auto industry, and they certainly don't know or understand what they say, what they have said, or what they will say in the future.

    Frankly, a bunch of monkeys could have done a better job making decisions by throwing darts at a board.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    I'll get in trouble for saying this, but you fellas are divorced from reality in this particular issue.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    I, personally, don't get hung up on 'topic drift' or a razor-straight interpretation of a topic.

    Topic drift is quite different from a "first" post "Title" of "Three quarter million Odys recalled", don't ya think?
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,325
    Hal Sperlich and Lee Iacocca

    Two immense failures in my opinion.

    Way overrated.

    Short term smarts maybe, but long term failures. No vision.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    edited January 2013
    Perhaps, but they were the two guys most responsible for the original Mustang. And guess what? They say they were influenced by the Monza.

    Another reality check is needed here.

    I'm not even a Ford guy, but to call the two guys most responsible for the original Mustang, and the one guy who came up with the FWD minivan concept, almost catatonic.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,038
    edited January 2013
    >Post topic and content are about a Honda "exclusively".

    All some posters come here to do is post about how wonderful (perfect?) Honda and toyota and other carmakers are compared to GM. Over and over and over to the point of making the topic boring and probably threatening to any newcomers looking in. Why would they want to return to a topic about GM where all they see is kvetching about GM's car is missing the same number of cupholders compared to the currect car with a halo on it.

    So a post about what the other car companies are doing and experiencing is just a reality check here. GM didn't have a major recall of merit and Honda has yet another problem.

    The topic, GM News, New Models, and Market Share, was a switch from the earlier titling which served as nothing more than a target for the GM haters because of their many sins in the past years (GM's sins, not the posters, :grin). I think including information about the competition so richly served up on a warm platter so much of the time is perfect here for the content being allowed to be included. Now if the topic were held to reasonably positive and useful information about GM, the new models, and the market share, I could see being concerned about inclusion of the full world of information about other companies out there.

    There's a topic here, GM Fans , which is clearly positive, but few want to go there to post. So it is what it is.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 39,936
    edited January 2013
    All some posters come here to do is post about how wonderful (perfect?) Honda and toyota and other carmakers are compared to GM.

    Well gee, Toyota did take the US Crown last year. :blush:

    Honda is off to the early lead for 2013 glory.

    Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 4,737
    Buying American (built in U.S., by a U.S. based company with a long U.S. history and a dealer network I trust) means more to me than some of that other stuff.

    I think we both want the same thing - a stronger U.S. We just see different paths to that end. You see support of local manufacturing and economy. I see supporting the strongest manufacturer who is making in the US, with less concern for the ownership of the company. I think supporting weakness is detrimental in the long run, which is also why I opposed the bailouts. Letting the strong survive and the weak die off is how the economy stays healthy. But I do understand and appreciate your perspective.
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 4,737
    edited January 2013
    All some posters come here to do is post about how wonderful (perfect?) Honda and toyota and other carmakers are compared to GM. Over and over and over to the point of making the topic boring and probably threatening to any newcomers looking in

    Honestly, this is a bit of a warped characterization. I see you calling all the other makes perfect as if in a sarcastic way, even though I rarely to never see actual other posters doing that. It seems more like your overrepresentation.

    Haven't I also seen you try to correct off-topic posters? Yet it's ok when it's a negative Honda report. ;) :surprise:
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    I think fintail guessed that Ford realized a market opportunity for a entirely new class of automobiles after Corvair was introduced. That is fair to say. MARKET OPPORTUNITY. But, Ford did not follow in the class that Corvair tried to create. Ford invented an entirely new class, the Pony Car.

    Therefore, to say that some do that Corvair in any way influenced and inspired the program of Ford from conception of a real type sports car and prototype in 1961, mid engine roadster Mustang I, to the eventual production model is absurd.

    Now, one could make the argument that the Mustang introduced in Spring, 1964 caused GM to realize a market opportunity of Pony Cars and they responded with Camaro and Firebird for model year 1967. And, that would be correct.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    Some people's problem is that they don't like the fact that GM isn't considered the class of the world. The solution to that problem, however, is to wish for GM to improve, not to run around complaining that the competition exists.

    GM is quite capable of standing up to criticism and responding to it. Look at how fast they're redesigning the Malibu once they feel pressure. The problem is not criticism, criticism is a positive thing, it indicates where improvement is needed. Problems happen when you shield someone from criticism, because then they never improve, nor see the need.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    Did you open Steve's link? ;)
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Posts: 2,743
    Yep, And one day GM can be as good as Toyota, and recall so many vehicles BEFORE they fall apart. :P
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,494
    GM has a lot of work to do to catch up with Toyota being the "Recall King"--and I shouldn't quote this without knowing for sure (although that never stops anybody else here)--I believe it has been for three years straight.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,038
    >Toyota did take the US Crown last year.

    >Honda is off to the early lead

    There is good and bad in all cars. Some have a little more of one or the other, but they all put their wheels on one lugnut at a time and the stores all have service departments in back. A local store of a brand of high reliability reputation advertises how many repair bays they have now in their repair shop. Odd. They don't need all those just for oil changes for the folks who think they have to take their xxx brand back to the xxx store for oil changes.

    GM has repair bays as well.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,496
    edited January 2013
    That is how I see it. Sure, the Monza opened some eyes to the potential of a small affordable sporty (in looks, anyway) American car. But I was thinking engineering/design wise, or even market position, where there is no influence at all. Not bashing the Corvair, they are interesting cars, but I don't think it has any influence on the pony cars other than maybe planting a seed in someone's mind.

    I see original Monza buyers as being unconventional and being car enthusiasts. I see original Mustang buyers as virtually anyone - who wanted something cool looking and affordable. The former has a much smaller demographic.
Sign In or Register to comment.