General Motors discussions

andre1969

I'm not sure, but I heard they cost around $1600 in 1969. That comes out to around $8500 today. But remember the Beetle back then was a stripper economy car that had been designed in 1939 and probably had its tooling fully amortized by the time the first atomic bomb dropped. The New Beetle is more of a "boutique" car, trying to be trendy, cute, and a bit upscale.

About the cheapest you could get in a domestic by then, I'm guessing, was around $2000. I think a base 1969 Valiant 2-door sedan was around $2094, or $11,120 today. That would be with the tiny slant six (can't remember if it was a 170 or 198 CID by then), 3 on the tree, 13" rims with dog dishes, no radio, no windshield tint, no a/c, manual steering/brakes. Maybe a heater...I think they were pretty much standard by then. 2 speed wipers with a foot pump for the washer. About the only things it would have that most cars today would be lacking in is front vent windows, superior fresh air ventillation, and roll-down rear windows, which most 2-door cars just don't do anymore.

Actually, now that I think of it, a stripper '69 Valiant almost seems pretty good compared to a stripper Stratus/Sebring sedan, so maybe here's one example where cars HAVEN'T really gotten much more value! :P

62vetteefp

Everything except bumpers...there may have been better bumper requirements then.

There were no bumper requirements in the early 60's. It was not until about '68 or so that the rubber fascias came into being due to low speed front and rear damage requirements.

sls002

The bumper standards did not take effect until sometime in the 70's, 1973 I think. My 71 Riviera had stylish bumpers that were not designed to bump. My 69 GTO had a plastic bumper for looks.

m1miata

And a 19" TV cost better than four times as much back when. Most every industry is now producing at a lower relative cost. Many cars are fair priced, or a bargain compared to the mid-seventies to later eighties, when most of the inflation occurred. That said, I still would like more cars available, like the PT is, in a base model. Let the consumer have a third choice. Mid-priced loaded, and bling-bling over the top, everything plus the kitchen sink cars is a second choice. I am not saying the air conditioning should not be standard. On the PT is it an option, which gives the impression that the car is a grand less than it truly is. This is not to say the car is not a giveaway price wise compared to what this car could have sold for back in the late eighties. With air, it is around $13,600 or so.

Now we have GM pricing. The Lucerne goes down from say $33K to $32K - big deal. Wait a year, or two at the most, and buy a used DTS, which looks better to me. Oh yeah, no 3.8V6 in any Caddy. The AWD Chrysler 300 Touring is being advertised at somewhere around $30K - or let's say up to $32. That is the 3.5V6 250HP and AWD. And how can Lucerne capture many of todays younger buyers? Even the babyboomers moved on years ago from what they once may have consider cool or elegant - luxury Buicks. Most see the whole line as tired an old. Even if the LaCrosse is better looking or more sporty looking than say the Chryslers, or the Ford Fusion, it has that familiar look of GM Buick, and nothing that says, hey look over here at this lot - got something sharp and fresh looking.

Without getting into a debate of Fusion vs. LaCrosse style, or Lucerne vs. the 300, in my view the Buicks are like a Japanese car pleasing enough, yet no stand-outs on style. Actually most people like the Accord styling, at least with the new butt on her. And if you want plain or less flashy styling, why would you switch from the Japan make you currently prefer. What makes you walk on over to the Buick or Chevy lot? Is it price? Hyundai has price, good stats on the car, and warranty. Are you looking for RWD? Are you looking for more style - something 2006?

Someone pointed out the Japan makes have a four cylinder in the base models. Well yes they do, and a very good one, I may add. GM was so proud of their new Cobalt and their four cylinder, which I take it is a decent little engine. Then comes Honda with a new Civic and new engine, and all the air is let out of the GM balloon. So now we have a lower price on Cobalts. That sure came sooner than later. Cobalt may indeed, at the current price, be a good deal. But resale, engineering, gas mileage, and such, once again is eclipsed by the Civic. It is not a bad car. It is just sad in a way that what looked promising as a replacement for Cavalier, became such a baby step. Wish GM would stop fooling with Civic killers, and make something like a larger car = Nova again, with some style, and not the strange looking Malibu.

That is IMHO, your views welcomed. Please don't shoot the messenger

Loren

chuck1959

It may have the hp for 32k but NOT the quality.

fred222

I have a 1969 LeBaron which was probably about $7500 new. This converts to just under $40,000 in today's money. I wonder how much the new Imperials will be?

ab348

For small cars like the Cobalt and Civic a 4-cylinder is perfectly appropriate. For a "fullsize" car like an Accord or Altima or Camry, a 4 -- no matter how good it may be -- is a ripoff of the consumer. A 4-cylinder will always be inherently inferior to an engine with more cylinders and will be cheaper to build. I've sat in too many Accords at stoplights where the 4-banger up front is doing the hippy-hippy shake.

sensai

It may have the hp for 32k but NOT the quality.

Funny, as the GTO is highly praised around the globe for its great build quality and nice interior. Maybe if some of you actually looked at some of GM's cars instead of just posting the tired rhetoric of "everything GM makes sucks", you would realize GM does have some nice cars (and yes some crappy ones too).

fordforme

I would have to agree. The build quality on the new GM cars is much better than a few years ago. The GTO is built down under and every article I read about it speaks about the great build quality. I'd get one, but it would not make a good winter car because there is no stability control. This car is one sleeper with clean looks and I expect it to retain its value. A nice alternative to the Corvette with two back seats.

carlisimo

I agree, the quality on GM cars designed and built abroad is great :P

m1miata

Never seen a Honda engine which was not quiet and smooth.
Maybe that was an American four cylinder auto. And they all have plenty of HP on tap.

Loren

grbeck

The federal 5-mph bumper standards applied to the front bumpers for the 1973 model year, and to the rear bumpers for the 1974 model year.

Some of the GM full-size cars actually had energy-absorbing front bumpers for the 1972 model years, one year in advance of the federal standards.

As for the "Endura" nose on late 1960s Pontiac GTOs - I remember ads featuring a man who whacked it with a crow bar, leaving it undamaged.

I also remember the deformable nose on the 1973-74 Pontiac Grand Am. My friends and I attended the first-ever auto show held in Harrisburg in 1974, and I remember squeezing the nose of the Grand Am to see if it would spring back to shape (it did).

m1miata

As for the "Endura" nose on late 1960s Pontiac GTOs - I remember ads featuring a man who whacked it with a crow bar, leaving it undamaged.
--end quote--
Yeah, do that today on a classic GTO and I bet you would be wearing the crowbar :P Do recall the ad.

I was at the county fair, many years ago, when the Saturn was new. They had a car door as a demo. You could jump on the door to see if it would dent. Well, a rather heavy cowboy, with the boots did just that. The door then needed repair. Kinda funny, but not for the car salesman, I guess. The plastic Saturns are fading away, as new designs will all appear as traditional metal. So why again do we need Saturn?

Loren

andre1969

on the old Saturn S-series metal or plastic? I knew a woman whose ex-husband stabbed a knife through it, leaving a nice, clean hole. Of course, if you have a strong enough knife, it'll cut through it whether it's plastic or metal.

My '69 Bonneville had a nosepiece that was soft-touch back in the day. But by the time I got ahold of it it had cracked and fallen apart, and had been patched up over the years with bondo. I think most of that soft-touch exterior stuff falls apart after awhile. In the 70's, it was common for cars like the Chysler NYer, Electra, 98, and DeVille to have a soft plastic fender extension on the back, between the rear bumper and the rear quarter. The 1980-83 Mirada/Cordoba had it too, and I'm sure other cars. Over time they'd get brittle and fragile, and crack apart, or take one hit too many as the bumper gets compressed in.

nwng

and buick is a very prestigious nameplate in the land of 13 bil people, honda and yota are just cheap'ol japanese cars for those who cannot afford the buick (and mb, bmw...). This was done without waving a single red white and blue flag.

How'd they do that?

lemko

Wow! What kind of psycho was this ex-husband stabbing cars? I sure hope you weren't dating this woman! Anyway, I have a VCR tape of old car commercials and the one for the Pontiac's Endura nose is on it. It shows a team of guys in white lab coats taking turns smacking the Pontiac's nose with crowbars.

carlisimo

"and buick is a very prestigious nameplate in the land of 13 bil people, honda and yota are just cheap'ol japanese cars for those who cannot afford the buick (and mb, bmw...). This was done without waving a single red white and blue flag.

How'd they do that? "

Buick had a small presence in China in the first half of the last century, among the ruling class. That's a good start for a reputation. Then the country closed itself off and missed out on automotive news. So no one told the Chinese that Buicks weren't cool anymore. They came back with the right cars for the market (they look cooler than ours too) and the people had faint memories of Buick having some grandness to it, so it's taken off. Most premium brands - just by selling only large, expensive cars - are off to a good start in the reputation game in China.

The Japanese brands will struggle there for nationalistic reasons. We hit them back harder and then found a common enemy, and that made it easy for us to make amends with them... but China did neither so the hatred still festers.

andre1969

I didn't date her, but a friend of mine did. Last I heard, she actually went back to this ex! :confuse:

carguy58

"in my view the Buicks are like a Japanese car pleasing enough, yet no stand-outs on style. Actually most people like the Accord styling, at least with the new butt on her. And if you want plain or less flashy styling, why would you switch from the Japan make you currently prefer."

Can the American Car Fans stop bashing the Japanese for vanilla styling already? The Domestics have bad styled cars as do the Japanese. I see BMW gets a free ride for the radical Bangle styling of late. The Mazda 6 or Acura TL looks better than any Buick I've seen in the past 15 years.

xrunner2

Can the American Car Fans stop bashing the Japanese for vanilla styling already? The Mazda 6 or Acura TL looks better than any Buick I've seen in the past 15 years.

How about 40 years, rather than 15, for Buick. Last decently styled Buick was Riviera (quite elegant) in mid-60s. This was an anomaly though. Check out grotesquely styled Buicks of late 50's such as 58 Roadmaster.

When you think of Buick through time and in recent decades, milquetoast styling and old f--t drivers come to mind.

As an aside, Buick doesn't even sound good in enunciation. Kind of like a burp. Enunciate Pontiac. It has a very good sound - strong, forceful, authoritative. Names and brands, with quality/value of course, are very critical in marketing. GM should rethink keeping Buick name/brand around. Does younger generation want a Buick?

m1miata

I wouldn't bash styling by Honda. Some Toyotas are pretty so-so to weird, like the Solara. As for BMW, the only one which is pretty bad is the 7 series. The others look kinda interesting. You can get ahead of the times, like the Chrysler Airflow. Ya know, that last Aurora Olds looks pretty good to me, as does the Eldorado. Most of the Japanese cars are pleasing enough to the eye. I like the Altima, and G35, but those Subarus, other than the Legacy, are all pretty bad.

Loren

gsemike

They didn't exactly get a free ride. The styling has been hotly debated and often criticized. The new 3 has toned it down quite a bit and the refreshed 7 toned it down as well.

carlisimo

I think the old BMW styling was dull and inelegant.

I'm on the fence about the new styling, but everyone's copying it. Doesn't mean it's good, but it's certainly popular.

xrunner2

The new 3 has toned it down quite a bit and the refreshed 7 toned it down as well.

The last 3, especially the coupe and convert, were sharp and had good cut lines. The new 3, except for traditional BMW grille, could pass for some mid-level Japanese or Korean compact sedan. Very generic. There are some GM cars that are clearly superior to the BMW 3 in styling.

gsemike

"There are some GM cars that are clearly superior to the BMW 3 in styling"

Name em

carguy58

"wouldn't bash styling by Honda."

Sorry I know you have own Honda's I think.

"Some Toyotas are pretty so-so to weird, like the Solara."

Toyota's styling was bland and inoffensive in the 90's but most of their cars do look kinda weird now on the outside. I think they are trying to hard to get younger buyers with their styling in the past few years.

"I like the Altima, and G35, but those Subarus, other than the Legacy, are all pretty bad."

The altima's styling is pretty cool. The G is kinda wild looking to me in both sedan and coupe form. Then again with most of Nissan/Infinti's styling the past few years either you like it or your indifferent to liking its styling. Subaru's-not my style really but they used to be decent looking for a few years in this decade(the 00's) until they put that nasty grille on all of their cars several months back. In the 90's Subaru's were pretty unstylish looking. I mean the Justy was very unstylish looking to me. The late 90's Subie wagon I think it was the Forester or maybe the Legacy wagon(I forget the name)was the only good looking Subaru to me back then.

I don't know I just haven't liked anything the Domestic Big 3 mostly have put out since the mid 90's except for Chrysler and I don't know why. I always liked Honda and Mazda a little and especially since the 1999 Protege came out(maybe its a generational thing I don't know.)I dug the the 02-05 Audi A4 and 02-05 VW Passat. The new A4's and Passats I don't care for their styling. I dug the mid 90's Mitsu Ecipse and Mitsu 3000GT back in my high school years. The Mitsu Diamante used to be a gorgeous looking car in the 90's too looking back on it. You have to remember I;m 26 years old.

andre1969

that there really is no right or wrong answer. Well, okay, there's the Aztek! :P As for BMW, I really don't like their new styling at all, except maybe for the little 6-series coupe/convertible and, oddly, the Z-4. So to answer the question of which GM cars have superior styling, I'd have to say "Most of them" :shades:

Seriously though, I'm getting used to the newer BMW styles, so they don't hurt my eyes nearly as much as they did. Still, comparing them to what came before, it's kinda like comparing your typical 1958 domestic to its 1957 counterpart.

carguy58

"The last 3, especially the coupe and convert, were sharp and had good cut lines. The new 3, except for traditional BMW grille, could pass for some mid-level Japanese or Korean compact sedan. Very generic."

Yeah the 99-05 3 Series was pretty elegant looking and looks sharper than the 06 3 Series in terms of exterior styling. I don't like side of the new 3 series at all. The front end styling is nice but the rest of the cars styling just doesn't flow right. The talights really don't look that good. On a positive note on the 06 3 Series in New Jersey you see many of them though. BMW's sell like hotcakes in NJ.

carguy58

"As for BMW, I really don't like their new styling at all, except maybe for the little 6-series coupe/convertible and, oddly, the Z-4."

The 6 Series and Z4 its either you like it or your indifferent to its styling in my opinion. The 7 Series and 5 Series are a mess styling wise. The 06 3 series while not ugly just doesn't look as sharp as the 99-05 3 Series.

62vetteefp

Just saw the Camry in real life at the auto show. It has an overall decent look but when you really look at it there are some features that just look different. Do not know what the general public will think but they will still sell. It has that BMW bustle back trunk lid that a lot of folks complain about. Also the way the hood overhangs the grill is kinda wierd. But overall nothing really fantastic or stylistic so again they hit the market and will sell.

62vetteefp

There have been quite a few comments on how the new civic interior blows away the Cobalt. There is nothing but hard plastic in the interior except the top of the door trim, the armrest cover and seats. I put my fingernail across the IP top pad and left visible scuffs that would not come out. Cobalt had basically the same amount of soft areas (very little). But if you look at both interiors I have to give the nod to the Civic for overall style but it is not like night and day. They both look pretty darn nice, just different style.

http://www.chevrolet.com/cobalt/photogallery/

http://www.japanesecarfans.com/news.cfm/newsid/2050901.005/pageview/photo/photo/- Mini16/page/1/honda/1.html

imidazol97

The Aurora was great especially the last ones. The Accord was weird in 03 version; the 06 has improved--I'm not sure who they copied with that rear end now but it's a great improvement, maybe it was the LaCrosse.

The Park Avenues had good styling, the last version and the version of 92 or whenever it started.

The Camerys of the last few years are gaudy with the taillights and headlights but plain jane everywhere else--like Buick.

xrunner2

"There are some GM cars that are clearly superior to the BMW 3 in styling"

Name em

Clearly superior: Cadillac CTS, STS, DTS, XLR, Pontiac G6
Merely better: Chevrolet Impala, Pontiac GTO (and this is a bland style), Grand Prix, Buick Lucerne (not a fan of Buick either)

Haven't mentioned the ugly BMW 2-seaters, but Corvette is an order of magnitude better in styling.

German stylists doing weird things. Look at Audi 8 front end with droopy mouth grille, big vertical bars. All Audis and VWs now starting to get gross looking grilles. (Notice a copy-cat Ford pickup with same theme). Merc S class has big rounded bulging extra fender lines. Maybe GM will be world leader in styling in coming years given what is going on in Europe (Italy excluded).

m1miata

Si 197 without a turbo. Good bye Cobalt SS.

carlisimo

Not necessarily in a race, but it looks cooler (esp. the rear), sounds cooler, and has much better feel. The last point is the one that matters.

62vetteefp

Saw it, love it. It is big. It has more interior room than the full size Tahoe. It's got style. It is 4 inches longer than a Tahoe, the same width, 4 inches shorter in height, and 3 inch longer wheelbase. It has three sets of seats. There is less rear room behind the rear most seat than a Suburban but the Suburban is 17" longer which is about the difference.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2006601190556

http://www.buick.com/

habitat1

Styling and personal preferences are subjective, but I could have my eyes gouged out and all Cadillacs would still make me turn my head. Inside and out. And, for what it's worth, the two companies that have captured 3 sales from us in the past two years - Acura and Porsche - have balance sheets and income statements "orders of magitude" better than GM.

I certainly respect your right to have your own subjective opinion, but try putting it in that context. Objectively, there is NOTHING "clearly superior" about GM's styling.

bumpy

It's as big as a Tahoe? Jeez.

62vetteefp

It's as big as a Tahoe? Jeez.

Pretty amazing isn't? Lots of folks are complaining about GM redoing there full size trucks (what were they supposed to do let it languish w/o major revisions while the competition brought out better?) and all the while (starting about 4 years ago) GM had a plan to bring out the people and people stuff hauling capability of full size and midsize SUV's in a car based crossover vehicle that will get much better mileage, costs less and I imagine handle better. It replaces, for those who do not have to haul heavy trailers, the Yukon, Suburban and midsize trailblazer XL's size SUV's. Oklahoma is closing down next month (builds XL's midsize SUV's) and using one less plant to build full size SUV's.

gsemike

OK... Every Caddy, the G6, the Grand Prix, the Lucerne and the Impala all have superior styling to the 3!!! I mean, the Gran Prix for crissakes??? That must be why they're having such an easy time moving all of these without discounts.

I saw a 4 door G6 this morning. It was white with plastic hubcaps. Man... was that a headturner.

sls002

While I think that BMW's styling in general is OK, I do not think that it is exceptionally good. One has to have other reasons for buying one. I do not like Pontiac's look. The Lucerne is better than the LeSabre, but not as good as the Park Avenues used to be. Caddy's art&science is not as bad as the aztec, but not really great either. The Impala's styling is OK, but not compelling.

The Camaro concept is quite good. The Buick LaCrosse concept from a few years ago was good. The Buick Enclave concept is a looker, but I suspect a production model will eat fuel like the V8 SRX does.

imidazol97

Anyone have a link to apicture of an Enclave?

andre1969

here's a shot of it. I really don't care for it too much from this angle...just looks a bit too chunky for my tastes, but no worse than anything else out there.

However, I think it looks very attractive from the side view.

xrunner2

OK... Every Caddy, the G6, the Grand Prix, the Lucerne and the Impala all have superior styling to the 3!!! I mean, the Gran Prix for crissakes??? That must be why they're having such an easy time moving all of these without discounts.

Suggest re-read of my post. Only Caddys and G6 "clearly superior" to BMW 3. I said that Impala, Lucerne and Grand Prix were "merely better", not superior.

Remember topic of board has to do with whether or not styling will save GM. Apparently, GM cars may not be moving off lots faster because of buying public's perceptions of GM quality/reliability/retained value/interiors/etc.

lemko

Another SUV? As Homer Simpson would say, "Booorrr-ing!" I wanna see more hot CARS like the Camaro concept.

carlisimo

You'll have a hard time finding a lot of agreement on your statement that Caddies and the G6 are clearly superior in style to the 3 (or to anything else). They've found fans, but there's no universal love of their styling.

xrunner2

While I think that BMW's styling in general is OK, I do not think that it is exceptionally good. One has to have other reasons for buying one.

The BMW 3 has a long history of being a top handling/performing car according to most car magazine testers and even Consumer Reports. Its heritage goes back to about 1968 - think it was a model "2002" upgraded from the "1600". Performance is probably the most prominent reason for buying one. Another "very" important reason is prestige that has accrured over the years because of the car's performance.

It would take a long time for the prestige to be tarnished due to mediocre styling as long as performance stays high. People will put up with a mediocre or ugly style if they can get outstanding performance, quality, reliability. Just look at popularity of Subaru WRX sti. I would highly doubt that anyone buys that car for its styling.

Another example of buyers ignoring ugly styling is the Porsche SUV. As long as it is a Porsche, they will buy it. One could speculate that if the GM Aztek could have outperformed say a Porsche SUV, it might still be around in spite of its gross styling.

lemko

...a GMC SUV that could outperform a Ferrari. It was the Typhoon.

xrunner2

There was a GMC SUV that could outperform a Ferrari. It was the Typhoon.

Keeping this on a GM styling line...There was a Pontiac GTO that supposedly outperformed a Ferrari GTO in a Car and Driver road test in 1964. The original GTO (64) and the next few years had very good styling "and" power. Pontiac and GM had no trouble selling "these" GTOs. When you see these vintages at car shows, they attract a lot of admiring fans.

gsemike

This is clearly superior but this is merely better??? Come on... what's the difference.

"GM cars may not be moving off lots faster because of buying public's perceptions of GM quality/reliability/retained value/interiors/etc."

um... aren't interiors part of styling?

The public has had long enough to embrace Potiac's family styling and never has. Name one car that they've produced in the last 20 years that was a home run.

Are you sure that America loves the styling of the Impala but is turned off by quality and resale value? The car is a retro 90 Lumina.