Everyone knows a "Hemi" is a pushrod engine. Same goes for the Triton. I think your dislike for GM goes beyond engines and transmissions. BTW- I like the 300C and Charger SRT-8's but wouldn't buy either one because just like you I like to row. Ford only offers the manual Tranny in what a Mustang ?
"Everyone knows a "Hemi" is a pushrod engine. Same goes for the Triton." Great, in a V8 application it works. Effortless power, tons of torque, don't need top end.
How do you explain the V6 applications? Who else relies on pushrod designs than GM for those?
Yes, it goes deeper than engine choice as to my dislike for GM.
"The only pushrod motors ford has are the lousy v6s they use in the Freestar, Mustang, Ranger etc."
I don't believe those are even pushrod. The 4.0l V6 is a SOHC design for the mustang V6 and top of the line Rangers. I had that motor in an Explorer Sport back in the late 90's. And the Freestar motor is the Duratec isn't it? Also an OHC design. The Vulcan was a Pushrod I believe...
Actually, Fords tritons have had lots of guts (torque), they just didn't pack much punch at high rpm (HP). Plus Ford trucks are a lot heavier than the competion, adding to the problem.
I have towed some heavy loads with 5.4 powered 3/4 ton Fords they are perfectly happy towing heavy loads. They just won't win any races.
I driven both since my FIL owns trucks from all brands from the Big 3 and a Toyota.
Don't get me wrong I actually like Fords and are excellent for pulling at low speeds, but they suck when you step on it and want to pass someone going 55 mph and you want to do 70 mph. :sick: My FIL get's :mad: everytime we go on a mini-trip to Amarillo with a load.
No, I don't like to put stickers on my cars... That one especially would get my car keyed for sure! BTW, there is one of those stickers with a girl rather than a little boy now. Kinda funny.
If someone likes GM, fine. I don't and the Edmunds rules don't state that I have to in order to post on the forums. There are a couple of offerings from most brands out there that I don't care for.
Shoot, I'm surprised to see Mitsubishi will still be alive in the future. I guess Jerry Springer and Maury Povich will still have an audience and still hosting their shows into their 90s. The only time I see Mitsu ads these days is for sleazy dealers from Southern NJ.
"Ninety-nine dollars down! Ninety-nine dollars a month!"
Yeah, for the first six months and then you payments go up to $399 or else there's a nasty balloon payment at the end which you figure you can pay because you're counting on being promoted to deputy assistant apprentice vice-manager in charge of onion rings after the 8-year term is up. Of course if your fast-track fast-food career doesn't pan out, you can still refinance that nasty balloon payment on your 8 year-old Galant for another 8 years! Yayyyy!!!
i read that too! The 4.2 didn't seem like a sound investment for Ford as it never made it to anything else in the lineup. Where the heck did that thing stem from?
I believe the 4.2 is either a stroked or bored 3.8 from the legendary head gasket blowers in from the older Taurus/Windstar.
The vulcan 3.0 was introduced (I believe) with the Taurus (1986) and hung around with the Taurus until the end. It was also offered as a midlevel engine in the Ranger for a while and was used in the early Ford Probe I think aswell.
The Vulcan was reliable, but horribly underpowered in todays market. My wife had it in her 03 Taurus company car and it was horribly slow.
Why VW so low? An ex-girlfriend of mine had a new 1994 Jetta that was in the shop every other week. When it wasn't in the shop, she was always asking me to look at something because the car was "acting funny." A front brake job cost $650 for what I thought was supposed to be an "economy car." It doesn't cost me that much for my Cadillac Seville STS 12 years later! Four spark plug wires were $90 when I could get a set for my 1975 Cadillac for $31. The car ate CV joints like they were going out of style. The front seat deteriorated after one year.
Things didn't improve as a friend of mine bought a new 2001 Jetta. He was so proud of the car I didn't want to rain on his parade by telling him about my ex's old ride. He found out for himself as the car puked a transmission and had numerous electrical gremlins. The car was so bad, he took a loss and traded it for a Saturn which gave him no trouble.
Funny thing though...guy who sits next to me at work has an 04 Jetta TDI - hasn't had a single issue with it at 25K miles.
My roomate in school had a 95 Jetta that his idiot yuppie parents gave him as a HS grad gift...that thing was in the shop about every 6 weeks. I remember it indeed ate CV joints and had wheel bearing issues all the time too.
He was so proud of the car I didn't want to rain on his parade by telling him about my ex's old ride
I hear that;
I have to say that talking about cars here is alot easier than telling your neighbor they paid way too much for a questionable ride. Rarely can I be honest to a friend after they buy their car and ask my opinion.
Today in New York, the brand will unveil the first examples of what it is calling the new face of Saturn
Saturn -- after squandering much of the goodwill it earned in the 1990s with its no-haggle dealers, distinctive cars and familial marketing pitch -- is ready for its second act.
This week, the General Motors Corp. division is introducing three models and a concept car at the New York International Auto Show, trotting out a new advertising slogan and trying to pound home a key message to anyone who will listen: Saturn has plenty of fight left in it.
Saturn, whose entire lineup was outsold by the Honda Accord sedan last year, may feel a need to justify its existence now more than ever.
As GM tries to rebuild after a staggering $10.6 billion loss last year, analysts and investors have clamored for the auto giant to ax at least one of its eight brands.
But GM has squarely backed Saturn, even after its missteps, as an important part of the automaker's future.
"I have a very strong opinion that brands get in trouble when they lose focus of who they are," said Jill Lajdziak, Saturn's vice president of sales, service and marketing. "And we're not going to let that happen."
GM did take a hard look at Saturn a few years back, with the goal of either fixing it or cutting it loose. But executives say the review led it to invest in building better vehicles.
Today in New York, GM will unveil the first examples of what it is calling the new face of Saturn.
The models -- along with the flashy new Sky roadster hitting dealerships now -- herald the biggest expansion of Saturn's lineup to date. Now with three models, Saturn will have double that number in showrooms by the end of the year.
But even with the added firepower, Saturn faces challenges as it tries to fend off foreign rivals in the same vehicle segments and grow beyond its reputation as a seller of affordable, plastic-sided cars with middling quality. GM tried a similar approach to overhaul and revive Oldsmobile in the 1990s, only to drop the brand.
Not too late for Saturn
Despite a long product lull, it's not too late to reinvigorate the Saturn brand, said David Hilton, an industry analyst with Capgemini in Detroit.
"I'm enthusiastic that they're starting to put something into Saturn," he said.
Saturn was launched in 1990 as a plucky, semi-independent maker of small cars created to beat the Japanese at their own game. From the start, GM wanted to set Saturn apart from its other brands, an idea reinforced in advertisements heralding the brand as "a different kind of company."
The brand enjoyed a cult-like following in the early years, attracting tens of thousands of Saturn owners to "homecoming" events at a Saturn factory in Spring Hill, Tenn. And the brand attracted customers who said they would have never considered a GM vehicle prior to buying a Saturn.
But over the years, the brand started to look more like others in the GM stable. The initial surge of enthusiasm attending its arrival dried up when GM failed to add new vehicles and did not update existing models.
After peaking with about 286,000 sales in 1994, Saturn sales fell to about 213,000 sales last year, according to Ward's Auto Data.
Among GM brands, Saturn outsells only Saab and Hummer, and it sells fewer cars in the United States than Mazda or Kia.
GM executives say they are determined not to let the brand lose its way again.
"You might say it is highly unlikely that we would make the same mistake twice," said GM Vice Chairman and product chief Robert Lutz, a champion of Saturn since he arrived at GM in 2001.
This afternoon, Saturn will take the wraps off the new Aura midsize sedan and Outlook midsize "crossover" SUV, along with a high-performance version of the Sky.
Then on Wednesday, Saturn is expected to show a compact SUV concept vehicle that is said to hint at the design of a future model.
The vehicles, with their European styling cues and improved interiors, are meant to signal a new design direction for Saturn and position the brand as more upscale.
Automaker realizes mission
That new direction is the outgrowth of a difficult period of soul-searching at Saturn, when the brand's future was briefly in question.
In 2003, Saturn designers were working on the next L-Series midsize sedan. But when the first stab was panned in internal reviews as a mediocre also-ran, the design team was told to start over. The marching orders were viewed internally as a sign GM's top executives would no longer accept lackluster Saturn designs.
"Frankly, it wasn't our best execution," said Liz Wetzel, director of GM's global brand design center in Warren.
What came next was a discussion of what Saturn was supposed to be. Its mission was still to be an import-fighter that drew new buyers to GM.
But while it still boasted good brand recognition and a solid dealer base, Saturn was lacking the right vehicles.
"We analyzed the reason for where we were with the brand: great dealers, loyal customers, bland products," Lutz said. "So we told ourselves: Why not link the reputation for service and sales integrity to existing, world-class products?" That's when GM decided to link vehicle development of its European Opel brand with Saturn, he said.
While GM still likes to think of Saturn as a different kind of company, it abandoned the tagline about three years ago. The new message became "People First," a reference to the brand's strong customer service.
This week, Saturn will introduce a new slogan to reflect both its history and its new vitality.
The slogan -- "Like Always. Like Never Before" -- will begin appearing in print and TV ads next month.
GM will spend millions to promote that Saturn is on the comeback, but the real test will be consumer reaction to the new vehicles once they land in dealerships.
Gauging interest
Early interest in the Sky roadster has been high, and the model is attracting a richer customer than Saturn is accustomed to, dealers said. But GM is not expecting large sales numbers for the tiny two-seater. The mass-market Aura, which arrives later this spring, and Outlook SUV, coming late this year, will be bigger indicators if Saturn is on the right path. A new Vue SUV with a gas-electric hybrid engine is also arriving in showrooms this year.
Mike Abrahms, a Saturn dealer in Stamford, Conn., is encouraged by the new models, which he saw for the first time last week at a dealer meeting in Dallas. He said after a few slow years, there is renewed optimism among his peers that the brand is on the mend.
"It's the best product we've ever had," he said. "It's going to put Saturn back on the map."
yes the Sky is a cool looking car, but is one car enough to save Saturn? Does this car even fit the mold of the Saturn demographic? If I'm a Pontiak dealer, I disapointed that I have to share my hot new roadster with the Saturn badge.
I think this is Saturn's last call. IMO their cars were all about a unique sales & marketing campaign wraped around a poor product.
Saturn holds the most promise in the GM lineup IMO. Buick and Pontiac are the ones looking old and outdated. The Sky is one of VERY few GM'ers I can appreciate at the moment. The Aura is "eh" I guess. The wheels on the production model are hideous and it appears there is no manual gearbox available with the V6. While that matters to very few people, it is a big deal for some hardcore Accord drivers like myself.
Saturn has helped squeeze Oldsmobile out. Chevrolet is hardly the first time buyer division anymore, and Pontiac has become the lost middle child that Oldsmobile once was.
That kind of puts Saturn where Plymouth was in the late 70's, entry-level without a full truck line-up. Chryslers answer was move Dodge down market (after trying to introduce Plymouth trucks failed) and slowly squeeze Plymouth out of existance.
I don't thing GM is ready to try and pull Chevrolet back down market, in fact I think Saturn will push Chevrolet up market farther.
Didja hear? The entire 2006 production run of the Solstice AND Sky is already sold out! Lutz hit that one on the head. Dunno about this Aura though - we will see. Since all the Saturn dealers anywhere near me have gone out of business since 2000, I probably won't see personally. I'm not curious enough to make a 50-mile drive just to try to find a Saturn dealer that hasn't bit the dust, to check out the Aura.
Besides, I am a lot more curious to see what they replace the godawful Ion with. Apparently that replacement is now on hold, and Saturn may go a few months to a year next year without a compact car...
I always though this topic should have been the Big 6, including Nissan and Honda. Those 6 account for 85% of all vehicle sales in the U.S. I would put Toyota and Honda on top - each has their strengths and their weaknesses. I would probably put Ford next, then Chrysler, then Nissan, with GM last.
But who is on their way up? I think Ford will make its way slooooooowly back up the list. I think Nissan will gradually drop, now that Ghosn has turned his attention to the Renault brand. I am afraid Chrysler may do the same as Daimler struggles to turn Mercedes around. As for GM, it is all business as usual over there - lots of talk and not much action. But they could head up the list too if they would just FOCUS! Reminds me of a grade school teacher I once had - she was always telling me if I would just FOCUS I could get straight A's. :-P
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Besides, I am a lot more curious to see what they replace the godawful Ion with. Apparently that replacement is now on hold, and Saturn may go a few months to a year next year without a compact car...
Seems fairly obvious it will be the Astra.
The two glitches I see are capacity for parts suppliers and whether there is some insurmountable US requirement not designed into the existing model.
From what I have seen of the Astra in Europe (and this was 1.5 years ago) the car is ahead or even to any compact in the US right now.
The biggest hazard will be avoiding the temptation to decontent the interior and drivetrain to meet a price point. Ford did that to the Focus and the Contour before it, and using the midline Malibu/G6 drivetrain in the base Aura is a big step in the wrong direction.
Ford did that to the Focus and the Contour before it, and using the midline Malibu/G6 drivetrain in the base Aura is a big step in the wrong direction.
Oh yes, more of this on paper h/p per litre, etc., etc.
Most entry Aura buyers will pay attention solely to the fact they will get the same or better mpgs from the 3.5 litre V6 as they would from a competitor's 2.4 and 2.4 litre fours.
I would have liked to see a diesel option. But that would have supposed the Feds are going to hold the oil refineries to having low sulphur diesel next year.
The interior of the Auro looks great, imo.
The Astra would probably come base with a 2.2 ecotec, and offer a 2.4 and 2.0 litre turbo option.
is gong to have a lot to do with pricing. If they price close or maybe even just slightly above a 4-cyl Camcord, then they could do ok. But if the price is over by say $500, then I think they've lost the "v6 power for 4cyl price" advantage. The 3.5 is efficient enought to compete but it's all about pricing now.
Oh yes, more of this on paper h/p per litre, etc., etc.
Most entry Aura buyers will pay attention solely to the fact they will get the same or better mpgs from the 3.5 litre V6 as they would from a competitor's 2.4 and 2.4 litre fours.
Nope, none of that. GM already offers a 3.5L/4-speed in two midsize sedans, so there's no need for a third version. The base Aura should have had the 2.8 V6 with 6-speed manual and automatics (the Vectra has a 2.8 turbo). The 2.4 hybrid will be available for gas-conscious buyers.
I like the way you think! CTS powertrain in an otherwise down-spec'ed car, selling for perhaps $5-7K less than the CTS.
Will the Aura's optional engine still be the DOHC 3.6 from the CTS? And has there been any estimate of what the base price for an Aura with that engine will be?
Both Camry and Accord have fairly fast V-6 models that start around $24K sticker. The V-6 Camry will be about as fast as an Aura with the 3.6, I would guess (not to mention, this year the Camry has a dedicated SE sport model that is more than just extra plastic everywhere - it comes with X-bracing for rigidity behind the rear seats and its own suspension and ride height). So an Aura 3.6 can't cost too much more than that $24K mark to start, if it wants to grab a big chunk of the market.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
there should not even BE a base Aura! Leave basic models to the Chevy Malibu and, to a lesser extent the Pontiac G6.
Having too many base models spread across too many divisions is what got GM in trouble in the first place. I thought they were trying to get out of that habit?
The base Aura should have had the 2.8 V6 with 6-speed manual and automatics (the Vectra has a 2.8 turbo). The 2.4 hybrid will be available for gas-conscious buyers.
I test drove a SportCombi Aero with the 2.8 turbo. It is a nice engine. You barely notice the turbo lag as it revs. I think it is expensive to build, however. At least the Aeros are pretty pricey. As best I know, GM is not making a whole lot of money selling aeros.
I imagine even a straight 2.8 would cost more than the 3.5.
Your point about the light hybrid combination is quite valid, however. As it will probably be priced close to the 3.5 litre Aura, I expect Saturn will find more people interested in that version than, say, Honda is having with its hybrid Accord. Apparently the problem is the hybrid is just too much more expensive the already reasonably economical 4 cyl. Accord. On the other hand, if the hybrid Aura gets around 10% better mpgs than a 3.5 but is only 3 or 4% more expensive, suddenly you have no reason to get the 3.5.
But then, why not just do what Andre suggests and drop the 3.5 altogether? A 2.4 light hybrid and 3.6 lux should be good enough. Leastways, that is, until the Aura redline comes out :P
not to mention, this year the Camry has a dedicated SE sport model that is more than just extra plastic everywhere - it comes with X-bracing for rigidity behind the rear seats and its own suspension and ride height
See my post above. Supposedly there will be an Aura Redline (or so the rumors have it).
I wonder who buys that car though. If Cadillac keeps a base version CTS with sports suspension option, anyone looking at the fwd Aura would be silly not to look at the rwd Caddy as prices would have to be close.
For that matter, anyone looking at Camry SE Sport would be wise to walk across the street to the Lexus dealer and check out a base IS. No way the Camry SE Sport is going to be significantly less than an IS.
Every car mfg out there has "base" models of it's vehicles, even BMW, Lexus, Caddy, Infinity, etc. offer lower level models. It's just how car mfg's market their cars. Saturn is no different. The difference being that the "base" Saturn Aura probably has a better feature content and more power than a "base" model Ion.
Comments
I'd also include lack of manual gearboxes in the GM lineup. For people like myself who actually like to "DRIVE" rather than ride in my car...
Rocky
Rocky
Ford Triton v8s have been SOHC from day one. The only pushrod motors ford has are the lousy v6s they use in the Freestar, Mustang, Ranger etc.
You can get a manual in a 4cyl Fusion and Focus along with some trucks I believe, and of of course the Mustang.
2. Ford
3. Chrysler
4. Hudson
5. Nash
6. Packard
7. Studebaker
How do you explain the V6 applications? Who else relies on pushrod designs than GM for those?
Yes, it goes deeper than engine choice as to my dislike for GM.
Rocky
Rocky
I don't believe those are even pushrod. The 4.0l V6 is a SOHC design for the mustang V6 and top of the line Rangers. I had that motor in an Explorer Sport back in the late 90's. And the Freestar motor is the Duratec isn't it? Also an OHC design. The Vulcan was a Pushrod I believe...
2. Ford
3. Chrysler and within a few years or so Mercedes will be sold off.
4. Honda
5. Toyota
6. Geely
7. Chery
8. Nissan
9. Kia
10. Mitsubishi
Rocky :P
I have towed some heavy loads with 5.4 powered 3/4 ton Fords they are perfectly happy towing heavy loads. They just won't win any races.
Don't get me wrong I actually like Fords and are excellent for pulling at low speeds, but they suck when you step on it and want to pass someone going 55 mph and you want to do 70 mph. :sick: My FIL get's :mad: everytime we go on a mini-trip to Amarillo with a load.
Rocky
Rocky
If someone likes GM, fine. I don't and the Edmunds rules don't state that I have to in order to post on the forums. There are a couple of offerings from most brands out there that I don't care for.
"Ninety-nine dollars down! Ninety-nine dollars a month!"
Yeah, for the first six months and then you payments go up to $399 or else there's a nasty balloon payment at the end which you figure you can pay because you're counting on being promoted to deputy assistant apprentice vice-manager in charge of onion rings after the 8-year term is up. Of course if your fast-track fast-food career doesn't pan out, you can still refinance that nasty balloon payment on your 8 year-old Galant for another 8 years! Yayyyy!!!
The Vulcan? :surprise:
The vulcan 3.0 was introduced (I believe) with the Taurus (1986) and hung around with the Taurus until the end. It was also offered as a midlevel engine in the Ranger for a while and was used in the early Ford Probe I think aswell.
The Vulcan was reliable, but horribly underpowered in todays market. My wife had it in her 03 Taurus company car and it was horribly slow.
Rocky
2. Ford
3. Chrysler
4. Hudson
5. Nash
6. Packard
7. Studebaker
What's this? A list of the dead and the dieing?
Cool!
Hey I got an ideer for another forum!
DrFill
how can you leave out Toyota?
ignoring the competition will not make them go away - GM can testify to that.
Seriously: I rank 'em in the order that I'd buy 'em. The top car manufacturer is the one from whom I buy - the clear winner.
To break it down in order of from whom I'm most likely to purchase a car to the least:
1. General Motors
2. Chrysler
3. Ford
4. Toyota (Lexus)
5. Mercedes-Benz
6. BMW
7. Honda (Acura)
8. Nissan (Infiniti)
9. Hyundai
10. Mazda
11. Subaru
12. Suzuki
13. Kia
14. Mitsubishi
15. VW
16. Isuzu
all kidding aside, you're living in the past.
curious as to why you placed VW/Audi so low on the chart
Rocky
Things didn't improve as a friend of mine bought a new 2001 Jetta. He was so proud of the car I didn't want to rain on his parade by telling him about my ex's old ride. He found out for himself as the car puked a transmission and had numerous electrical gremlins. The car was so bad, he took a loss and traded it for a Saturn which gave him no trouble.
My roomate in school had a 95 Jetta that his idiot yuppie parents gave him as a HS grad gift...that thing was in the shop about every 6 weeks. I remember it indeed ate CV joints and had wheel bearing issues all the time too.
:P
Rocky
I hear that;
I have to say that talking about cars here is alot easier than telling your neighbor they paid way too much for a questionable ride. Rarely can I be honest to a friend after they buy their car and ask my opinion.
On this board however - it isn't a problem.
Rocky
Saturn -- after squandering much of the goodwill it earned in the 1990s with its no-haggle dealers, distinctive cars and familial marketing pitch -- is ready for its second act.
This week, the General Motors Corp. division is introducing three models and a concept car at the New York International Auto Show, trotting out a new advertising slogan and trying to pound home a key message to anyone who will listen: Saturn has plenty of fight left in it.
Saturn, whose entire lineup was outsold by the Honda Accord sedan last year, may feel a need to justify its existence now more than ever.
As GM tries to rebuild after a staggering $10.6 billion loss last year, analysts and investors have clamored for the auto giant to ax at least one of its eight brands.
But GM has squarely backed Saturn, even after its missteps, as an important part of the automaker's future.
"I have a very strong opinion that brands get in trouble when they lose focus of who they are," said Jill Lajdziak, Saturn's vice president of sales, service and marketing. "And we're not going to let that happen."
GM did take a hard look at Saturn a few years back, with the goal of either fixing it or cutting it loose. But executives say the review led it to invest in building better vehicles.
Today in New York, GM will unveil the first examples of what it is calling the new face of Saturn.
The models -- along with the flashy new Sky roadster hitting dealerships now -- herald the biggest expansion of Saturn's lineup to date. Now with three models, Saturn will have double that number in showrooms by the end of the year.
But even with the added firepower, Saturn faces challenges as it tries to fend off foreign rivals in the same vehicle segments and grow beyond its reputation as a seller of affordable, plastic-sided cars with middling quality. GM tried a similar approach to overhaul and revive Oldsmobile in the 1990s, only to drop the brand.
Not too late for Saturn
Despite a long product lull, it's not too late to reinvigorate the Saturn brand, said David Hilton, an industry analyst with Capgemini in Detroit.
"I'm enthusiastic that they're starting to put something into Saturn," he said.
Saturn was launched in 1990 as a plucky, semi-independent maker of small cars created to beat the Japanese at their own game. From the start, GM wanted to set Saturn apart from its other brands, an idea reinforced in advertisements heralding the brand as "a different kind of company."
The brand enjoyed a cult-like following in the early years, attracting tens of thousands of Saturn owners to "homecoming" events at a Saturn factory in Spring Hill, Tenn. And the brand attracted customers who said they would have never considered a GM vehicle prior to buying a Saturn.
But over the years, the brand started to look more like others in the GM stable. The initial surge of enthusiasm attending its arrival dried up when GM failed to add new vehicles and did not update existing models.
After peaking with about 286,000 sales in 1994, Saturn sales fell to about 213,000 sales last year, according to Ward's Auto Data.
Among GM brands, Saturn outsells only Saab and Hummer, and it sells fewer cars in the United States than Mazda or Kia.
GM executives say they are determined not to let the brand lose its way again.
"You might say it is highly unlikely that we would make the same mistake twice," said GM Vice Chairman and product chief Robert Lutz, a champion of Saturn since he arrived at GM in 2001.
This afternoon, Saturn will take the wraps off the new Aura midsize sedan and Outlook midsize "crossover" SUV, along with a high-performance version of the Sky.
Then on Wednesday, Saturn is expected to show a compact SUV concept vehicle that is said to hint at the design of a future model.
The vehicles, with their European styling cues and improved interiors, are meant to signal a new design direction for Saturn and position the brand as more upscale.
Automaker realizes mission
That new direction is the outgrowth of a difficult period of soul-searching at Saturn, when the brand's future was briefly in question.
In 2003, Saturn designers were working on the next L-Series midsize sedan. But when the first stab was panned in internal reviews as a mediocre also-ran, the design team was told to start over. The marching orders were viewed internally as a sign GM's top executives would no longer accept lackluster Saturn designs.
"Frankly, it wasn't our best execution," said Liz Wetzel, director of GM's global brand design center in Warren.
What came next was a discussion of what Saturn was supposed to be. Its mission was still to be an import-fighter that drew new buyers to GM.
But while it still boasted good brand recognition and a solid dealer base, Saturn was lacking the right vehicles.
"We analyzed the reason for where we were with the brand: great dealers, loyal customers, bland products," Lutz said. "So we told ourselves: Why not link the reputation for service and sales integrity to existing, world-class products?" That's when GM decided to link vehicle development of its European Opel brand with Saturn, he said.
While GM still likes to think of Saturn as a different kind of company, it abandoned the tagline about three years ago. The new message became "People First," a reference to the brand's strong customer service.
This week, Saturn will introduce a new slogan to reflect both its history and its new vitality.
The slogan -- "Like Always. Like Never Before" -- will begin appearing in print and TV ads next month.
GM will spend millions to promote that Saturn is on the comeback, but the real test will be consumer reaction to the new vehicles once they land in dealerships.
Gauging interest
Early interest in the Sky roadster has been high, and the model is attracting a richer customer than Saturn is accustomed to, dealers said. But GM is not expecting large sales numbers for the tiny two-seater. The mass-market Aura, which arrives later this spring, and Outlook SUV, coming late this year, will be bigger indicators if Saturn is on the right path. A new Vue SUV with a gas-electric hybrid engine is also arriving in showrooms this year.
Mike Abrahms, a Saturn dealer in Stamford, Conn., is encouraged by the new models, which he saw for the first time last week at a dealer meeting in Dallas. He said after a few slow years, there is renewed optimism among his peers that the brand is on the mend.
"It's the best product we've ever had," he said. "It's going to put Saturn back on the map."
Rocky
And, The Saturn Sky fairly reeks of coolness!
DrFill
I think this is Saturn's last call. IMO their cars were all about a unique sales & marketing campaign wraped around a poor product.
I think GM would do well to ax this brand.
The no haggle buying experience is attractive.
That kind of puts Saturn where Plymouth was in the late 70's, entry-level without a full truck line-up. Chryslers answer was move Dodge down market (after trying to introduce Plymouth trucks failed) and slowly squeeze Plymouth out of existance.
I don't thing GM is ready to try and pull Chevrolet back down market, in fact I think Saturn will push Chevrolet up market farther.
Besides, I am a lot more curious to see what they replace the godawful Ion with. Apparently that replacement is now on hold, and Saturn may go a few months to a year next year without a compact car...
I always though this topic should have been the Big 6, including Nissan and Honda. Those 6 account for 85% of all vehicle sales in the U.S. I would put Toyota and Honda on top - each has their strengths and their weaknesses. I would probably put Ford next, then Chrysler, then Nissan, with GM last.
But who is on their way up? I think Ford will make its way slooooooowly back up the list. I think Nissan will gradually drop, now that Ghosn has turned his attention to the Renault brand. I am afraid Chrysler may do the same as Daimler struggles to turn Mercedes around. As for GM, it is all business as usual over there - lots of talk and not much action. But they could head up the list too if they would just FOCUS! Reminds me of a grade school teacher I once had - she was always telling me if I would just FOCUS I could get straight A's. :-P
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Seems fairly obvious it will be the Astra.
The two glitches I see are capacity for parts suppliers and whether there is some insurmountable US requirement not designed into the existing model.
From what I have seen of the Astra in Europe (and this was 1.5 years ago) the car is ahead or even to any compact in the US right now.
Oh yes, more of this on paper h/p per litre, etc., etc.
Most entry Aura buyers will pay attention solely to the fact they will get the same or better mpgs from the 3.5 litre V6 as they would from a competitor's 2.4 and 2.4 litre fours.
I would have liked to see a diesel option. But that would have supposed the Feds are going to hold the oil refineries to having low sulphur diesel next year.
The interior of the Auro looks great, imo.
The Astra would probably come base with a 2.2 ecotec, and offer a 2.4 and 2.0 litre turbo option.
Most entry Aura buyers will pay attention solely to the fact they will get the same or better mpgs from the 3.5 litre V6 as they would from a competitor's 2.4 and 2.4 litre fours.
Nope, none of that. GM already offers a 3.5L/4-speed in two midsize sedans, so there's no need for a third version. The base Aura should have had the 2.8 V6 with 6-speed manual and automatics (the Vectra has a 2.8 turbo). The 2.4 hybrid will be available for gas-conscious buyers.
Will the Aura's optional engine still be the DOHC 3.6 from the CTS? And has there been any estimate of what the base price for an Aura with that engine will be?
Both Camry and Accord have fairly fast V-6 models that start around $24K sticker. The V-6 Camry will be about as fast as an Aura with the 3.6, I would guess (not to mention, this year the Camry has a dedicated SE sport model that is more than just extra plastic everywhere - it comes with X-bracing for rigidity behind the rear seats and its own suspension and ride height). So an Aura 3.6 can't cost too much more than that $24K mark to start, if it wants to grab a big chunk of the market.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Having too many base models spread across too many divisions is what got GM in trouble in the first place. I thought they were trying to get out of that habit?
I test drove a SportCombi Aero with the 2.8 turbo. It is a nice engine. You barely notice the turbo lag as it revs. I think it is expensive to build, however. At least the Aeros are pretty pricey. As best I know, GM is not making a whole lot of money selling aeros.
I imagine even a straight 2.8 would cost more than the 3.5.
Your point about the light hybrid combination is quite valid, however. As it will probably be priced close to the 3.5 litre Aura, I expect Saturn will find more people interested in that version than, say, Honda is having with its hybrid Accord. Apparently the problem is the hybrid is just too much more expensive the already reasonably economical 4 cyl. Accord. On the other hand, if the hybrid Aura gets around 10% better mpgs than a 3.5 but is only 3 or 4% more expensive, suddenly you have no reason to get the 3.5.
But then, why not just do what Andre suggests and drop the 3.5 altogether? A 2.4 light hybrid and 3.6 lux should be good enough. Leastways, that is, until the Aura redline comes out :P
See my post above. Supposedly there will be an Aura Redline (or so the rumors have it).
I wonder who buys that car though. If Cadillac keeps a base version CTS with sports suspension option, anyone looking at the fwd Aura would be silly not to look at the rwd Caddy as prices would have to be close.
For that matter, anyone looking at Camry SE Sport would be wise to walk across the street to the Lexus dealer and check out a base IS. No way the Camry SE Sport is going to be significantly less than an IS.