Some people like plastic doors or cladding you know
I'm a fan of the self-healing cladding I've had on a few crossovers, so I get that.
Still, to me Saturn was a low-pressure sales model. It would make sense for GM to use a similar no-haggle model to sell certain cars from certain outlets, perhaps.
But invest big in a return of Saturn, and Chevys will go stale like they did in the 90s.
The disloyalty is less bad than other GM brands. "Only" 60% of owners bail, vs. more for other GM brands.
They still have some work to do.
The best way to improve this IMHO is to use their limited resources on making their existing brands and products more excellent. The addition of brands just dilutes attention: "Well, if the buyer ditches the crap at Chevy, perhaps they'll stay in the GM fold by buying Saturn or Pontiac instead". Why not make sure Chevy is so excellent that they retain the buyer in the first place, like Honda and Toyota do more successfully?
Dumb. Most of the time you're only using less than half of the available space. It'll be hard to tell at a glance, when you pass that speed cam, if you're doing 45 or 55.
There's too much goodwill in those brands to ignore for too many years.
I love discussions like this - in ten years, I can still say "just wait". And if there's a GTO special edition in ten years, I can go to "Toot your Horn or Eat Your Hat (or both?)" (assuming I can still remember this thread in two months, much less ten years :shades:)
There's too much goodwill in those brands to ignore for too many years.
Hasn't that horse left the barn already?
IMHO there's also a lot of BADwill with all of the brands. Better to clean one or two of them up than restore the other ones. It's not like the GM market share was going up all of those years.
I get that - certain models make people nostalgic. BUT - for the most part we're talking about (much) older buyers.
Even then - the modern GTO already failed to sell well. The G8 would sell better as a Caprice SS. Camaro always outsold the Trans Am, didn't it? What name plates do you want to see make a come back?
Saturn? With names like SL1, SC whatever, L200, seriously? Zero value left in those names.
The best way to improve this IMHO is to use their limited resources on making their existing brands and products more excellent. The addition of brands just dilutes attention: "Well, if the buyer ditches the crap at Chevy, perhaps they'll stay in the GM fold by buying Saturn or Pontiac instead". Why not make sure Chevy is so excellent that they retain the buyer in the first place, like Honda and Toyota do more successfully?
I agree. GM has yet to flush all of the dogs out of Chevy, GMC, Buick, and Cadillac. GM has a long way to go before they can even think of creating another brand.
Andre likely knows, but my guess is the T/A outsold the Camaro in the late 70's around the time of Smokey and the Bandit. Seems everyone wanted 6.6 and fire chicken decals on the hood;)
Saturn? With names like SL1, SC whatever, L200, seriously? Zero value left in those names.
It's not the names that made Saturn, it's the no-haggle pricing, and excellent customer service they offered. My sister wouldn't be on her third Saturn if their dealers/service departments weren't as complacent or pathetic as the rest of the GM dealers were (and still are, in most cases).
I could imagine a "Trans Am" package on a Camaro, perhaps. Without a Pontiac brand or separate model.
For instance, the upcoming ZL1 package - poorly named and means nothing to anyone. They didn't even use Z28.
I can imagine Saturn being to Chevy what Scion is to Toyota. Not a full brand, but a subset of small cars targeted at young buyers. The Spark and Sonic could be Saturns. It even sounds catchy - Saturn Spark, Saturn Sonic.
Officially it's Toyota Scion xB, but nobody thinks of them that way, they just say Scion. Could be the same with Saturn/Chevy.
Any why not? They have nothing to lose, when it comes to small cars Chevy keeps tossing out names anyway (Cavalier, Cobalt).
Agreed - and they could bring those back, offer the Spark and Sonic in a sub-brand, with no-haggle pricing (which appeals to first time buyers, older folks like to haggle). Roll out free oil changes for 2 years, which costs next to nothing, and welcome young buyers to GM.
Andre likely knows, but my guess is the T/A outsold the Camaro in the late 70's around the time of Smokey and the Bandit. Seems everyone wanted 6.6 and fire chicken decals on the hood;)
I'd have to look it up to be sure, but from around 1977-81, I think there might have been a couple years in there that the Firebird/Trans Am outsold the Camaro. I think there were a couple years in there that just the Trans Am alone accounted for more than 100,000 sales. In contrast, in later years, I think the Camaro started concentrating selling more base models and chick-car Berliinettas, rather than the Z/28.
It probably also helped the Firebird's image that you could get a 400/403, an in later years a turbocharged 301, whereas the Camaro was just topping out with a 350.
>I can imagine Saturn being to Chevy what Scion is to Toyota. Not a full brand, but a subset of small cars targeted at young buyers. The Spark and Sonic could be Saturns. It even sounds catchy - Saturn Spark, Saturn Sonic.
You've had some good logic points through the discussion on this.
1. Saturn was suffocated with lack of funding after things got going. Using the Saturn name could have some value.
2. Does the name "Saturn" have value with young buyers or with older buyers now in their 30s / 40s?
I think the answer is both. There are many young people driving around in Saturns in our areas. These are Saturns with 2 doors and 4 doors in their economical small car versions. So there's an opportunity to cash in on the cachet of value in the name for many young drivers instead of having Honda benefit from their earliest car being a used Civic.
3. The studies indicated for GM that people buying Saturn wanted "anonymous" character features to their cars. They just wanted cars that blend in. I don't think that is right, but that was what GM had concluded and styling of later Saturns seems to reinforce that, except for the SKY.
There are many young people driving around in Saturns in our areas. These are Saturns with 2 doors and 4 doors in their economical small car versions. So there's an opportunity to cash in on the cachet of value in the name for many young drivers instead of having Honda benefit from their earliest car being a used Civic.
That's probably more due to driving what they can afford vs. driving what they want. My wife used to have an SL2, my MIL had an SL2, and my SIL had an SC1. I don't miss them and I certainly wouldn't want to drive around in one of those penalty boxes today.
In the beginning most Saturn fans liked the fact they weren't run of the mill rebadged GM crap. Once that started, many left. My MIL moved on to Toyota, my SIL has an Acura, and my wife certainly certainly has no desire for another Saturn.
So even back then, you could argue the T/A only did better when Chevy was handicapped with smaller engines.
Well, in those days they still tried to differentiate the brands more, so I think the expectation was that a Firebird or Trans Am was supposed to be a better, more expensive car than a Camaro.
having Honda benefit from their earliest car being a used Civic
That sums it up.
Civic and Corolla are names that have been around forever. People with used ones that go 200k miles will buy a new one at least once, no matter how de-contented and "not-as-good-as-it-used-be" they may be.
Kids driving their mom's old Cavalier or Cobalt are going to wonder why the names don't even exist any more.
GM should bring up successful names from the past. Not all of them - just the nostalgic ones.
Civic and Corolla are names that have been around forever. People with used ones that go 200k miles will buy a new one at least once, no matter how de-contented and "not-as-good-as-it-used-be" they may be.
Kids driving their mom's old Cavalier or Cobalt are going to wonder why the names don't even exist any more.
I keep coming back to "make the products excellent". Like the Cruze is on the way to doing, and perhaps the Spark as well.
Names are retained (a la Civic/Corolla) when the products are consistently successful. Names are changed (a la Vega/Chevette/Cavalier/Cobalt) when the market does not have a highly positive historical impression.
Make the current GMs excellent, and the kids of today's drivers will remember those names and buy those names 20 years from now. It's a long term business.
And I don't even need Wagoner's $10mill/year to know that. :surprise:
GM should bring up successful names from the past. Not all of them - just the nostalgic ones.
They seem to be doing pretty well with the Malibu. As of 2012, that makes 16 years that the name's been in production. The original Malibu lasted 20 years, from 1964, when it was a top trim level of the Chevelle, through 1983, when it was phased out to make way for the Celebrity.
They have had a few rough patches though, first letting the '97 style go too long without change, and then the 2004-07 model not being "new" enough. They seemed to have gotten it more or less right with the 2008 model though, and even though we're 5 years into that one, I think it's aged fairly well.
Unfortunately, I don't think they've done as well with the Impala. I even remember Edmund's testing a first year 2000 model, and back then they were criticizing it. They said that while the Malibu was "The car you knew America could build", the Impala was "The car you knew American WOULD build" :sick:
The Impala has been improved over the years, but it's just not been enough.
I guess the fact that the Cruze has an all-new name suggests that Chevy has always been weak in small cars. I guess they could've called it "Nova" if they wanted to, though. That's one small (well, okay compact) name that Chevy never really mucked up with a bad model.
I keep coming back to "make the products excellent". Like the Cruze is on the way to doing, and perhaps the Spark as well.
That pretty much sums it up. The Cruze has proven that if the product is good, people will buy it. Ford, Chrysler, and GM have improved market share due to offering better product.
If they ever come out with the performance variant of the Cruze, however, I think they could called that the "Cruve Nova". That would work.
See what I mean? You can bring back a name without the expense of a full brand.
And ... if they put those names only on models WORTHY of nostalgia, it would work even better.
No fair to slap the Nova name on every rental car they sell to Budget. Save it JUST for the turbo model. The engine is headed for the Verano, so it would cost next to nothing to do it.
The Cruze has proven that if the product is good, people will buy it.
I think I remember reading that the lady in charge of design at GM had to fight against the beancounters to upcontent the interior of the Cruze. And look at what a good decision that was. They still have to fight against all the old mistakes they used to make (too many mediocre brands, models, cheapness, etc.).
Unfortunately, I don't think they've done as well with the Impala.
No question. IMO, the Impala wasn't competitive in '00 let alone '06. The 07 refresh didn't do much. Sure, it looks better, but currently the Impala is a turd. Other than being able to buy one cheap, I don't know why anyone would aspire to own it. I'm willing to bet if you asked most of the people who drive them (if it's not a company car or rental), the most popular response will be "I got it cheap".
My wife had an 01 Impala. I found it ugly inside and out with below average build quality. In essence it was a typical GM product in the early '00s.
The new Impala can't come soon enough. At least the Malibu is good enough and the new one looks nice.
Here's a lineup I'd like to see, with names worthy of their heritage:
Saturn Spark Saturn Sonic Chevy Cruze Nova (2.0T, DI, high boost) Chevy Camaro Z28 (instead of ZL1 name) Chevy Impala SS (V8 only, from the cop car package)
We just brought back 4 nostalgic names in a proper manner, for little/no cost.
actually, I just thought of one Chevy small car name I thought was kinda cool. Monza. Even though it was just a facelift of the ill-fated Vega, I always thought they were good looking cars. They were good sellers too, right up through the end in 1980.
They weren't exactly reliable, but at least the name hasn't become toxic, IMO at least, like Corvair, Vega, Chevette, Citation, and Cavalier have.
I just thought of one Chevy small car name I thought was kinda cool. Monza
I liked the clam shell fastback, even if I didn't fit in it very well, but didn't care for the formal roof sedan all that much. Actually, Monza goes back to the upscale Corvair model. The mid to late 60's ones were very nice cars.
That's right, I had forgotten about the Corvair Monza! When my Mom was looking for a new car in late '79/early '80, one of the cars she was considering was a Chevy Monza. I had gotten a Matchbox race track for Christmas in '79, and one of the racecars was a blue Monza. I was hoping she'd bring home a Monza just like that! Nevermind the fact that it would probably be too small, and a piece of junk, but logic doesn't always work well with 9 year olds.
She ultimately got a 1980 Malibu coupe, but she at least granted my wish, in getting a blue one!
Kids driving their mom's old Cavalier or Cobalt are going to wonder why the names don't even exist any more.
I think those kids will save 99% of their wonder to why their Mom ever bought that load of crap in the first place, rather than why the name doesn't exist anymore.
It is plainly obvious to me why they don't try to sell "Neons" anymore. I don't have to wonder about that. Though I do wonder why people buy Calibers just because the name isn't a Neon it still is a Neon for the most part.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Actually, the Caliber has very little, if anything in common withe Neon. (and funny this would come up, because I just looked out the window, and the neighbor's friend's Neon is back!) Anyway, the Caliber is actually based on something called the GS platform, which was co-developed with Mitsubishi.
It started life as the Mitsubishi Outlander, but then the Dodge Caliber, Jeep Compass, and Patriot joined it. Also, I hadn't realized this before, but according to Wikipedia (so take with a grain of salt) the Mitsubishi Lancer, Dodge Journey, and even the Dodge Avenger and Chrysler Sebring (now the 200) owe some of their existence to this platform.
Personally, I think they made a mistake replacing the Neon with the Caliber. The Caliber is sort of a small wagon/hatch/crossover type thing, so it would compete more with something ilke a Toyota Matrix/Pontiac Vibe or a Ford Focus wagon, which is definitely a slightly more nichey market than a mainstream small sedan. It was also a lot more expensive than the Neon, and not as fuel efficient.
Now, I'm not giving the Neon a free pass here. I think they should have done something to improve the car. I actually liked it because it was one of the few small cars I could fit comfortably in, both front and rear. But, they really needed to throw a little more money into the interior. And stop doing stupid stuff like when you ordered power windows, you only got power for the front, and the rears were still crank. That's just cheap. And while the R/T models could be good performers, they really needed to do something with the lesser models. 132 hp was phenomenal for a base engine in this class when the car came out in early 1994. But by 2005, the final year, it was only so-so.
Kids driving their mom's old Cavalier or Cobalt are going to wonder why the names don't even exist any more.
My son bought a 2000 Cavalier and put 200k trouble free miles on it. It cost $10,500 new. He then bought a 2007 Cobalt which he has now and has been a great car. It's at about 75K and the only repair has been a left front wheel bearing and a set of tires.
By the way I rode in and drove the Cobalt on a 400 mile trip to visit my brother in VA. I found it comfortable and quiet and it had plenty of pep with the standard motor. It got great mileage on the road - around 35 mpg. I found it to be smoother and quieter than my cousin's 2010 Acura RDX.
back in college, one of my friends had an '89 Cavalier Z24 coupe. That thing was a sharp little car, or so we thought at the time. Maybe if I had to revisit it, after 20+ years of jading, I might think differently of it.
I always thought the Cav hit its peak around 1988-90. The '88 restyle was a major improvement, and the cars actually seemed nice inside! But, they cheapened them somewhat around 1991-94.
Motortrend or C&D made a comment about the 1995 era Cavalier being a much improved car almost to the point that it made the 2nd-generation Saturn S-series redundant. To me though, it felt like more cost-cutting, and the 1995+ Cavalier didn't feel as comfortable inside to me. It felt more cramped.
I know the Cobalt got mainly mediocre-to-negative reviews, but I liked the few that I've sat in at auto shows. It actually felt like it fit my body better than any car in its class...good legroom, a footwell that's not too crowded, etc. Now, that did come at the expense of back seat room, but for a solo commuter, or if I only have two other people in the car (and the front seat passenger isn't too tall) it probably would make a decent car.
My friend's brother had either a 1985 or 1986 Cavalier wagon. I was surprised how much cargo that little wagon held with the back seat folded back. A whole couch fit in there with assorted boxes of other stuff without a problem.
A for a kid wondering about getting Mom's old Cavalier or Cobalt, the little brat shouldn't complain about getting a free car. If I got a free car from my parents and I complained about it, Dad would smack me upside the head, use a few choice expletives, and take the keys away.
There's bad news and good news for General Motors and Ford. The bad news? Their bond ratings are junk. The good news? Now they are really, really, really good junk.
Moody's Investors Service raised the bond ratings of Ford and General Motors to the cusp of investment grade, citing new U.S. labor contracts that preserve the automakers' cost positions, Bloomberg News reports. Both automakers saw their bond ratings fall to junk status six years ago as their outlook continued to degrade.
Actually, the Caliber has very little, if anything in common withe Neon.
While the parts and pieces might have different manufacturer model numbers/names, the car still gets the same low CR scores for quality, reliability and so on and so forth. It also comes from the same company. The PT Cruiser shared the same platform and parts and pieces I believe. Didn't take long for poor reliability to take that "fad" away.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I found it to be smoother and quieter than my cousin's 2010 Acura RDX.
Wow, then why in the world are RDX's selling for MORE than Cobalt's and Cavaliers? Surely Acura doesn't hypnotize people into buying their cars.
Maybe he has summer performance tires on the RDX which can be loud and harsh on some roads. I think the RDX takes any Cobalt short of the SS in a race with one hand tied behind the driver's back.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Buick is paying dividends for GM October 31, 2011: 5:00 AM ET Treasury officials considered shutting down GM's also-ran luxury brand in 2009. Now, the decision not to is looking brilliant. By Doron Levin, contributor
FORTUNE -- U.S. Treasury officials weren't sure in 2009 whether General Motors ought to shut down its Buick division as part of the government-sponsored bankruptcy. Their decision to hang on to the brand is looking better by the day.
Buick (GM) sales in the U.S. soared 48% in 2010 from 2009 on the strength of the fullsize LaCrosse sedan and Enclave crossover and another 24% this year following the successful introduction of the smaller Regal sedan.
The latest entry, dubbed Verano, will be arriving shortly to Buick's 2,100 dealers and it looks like a strong contender as well. The Verano intends to compete among higher-end compacts; it features the same architecture as the Chevrolet Cruze and Opel Astra, with lots of tweaks, rakish lines, high-fashion touches and advanced engineering to give it a more luxurious feel.
GM, with its Buick brand, is turning the tables on more prestigious brands such as Toyota's (TM) Lexus and BMW by offering premium features at a more competitive price, according to Roger McCormack, Buick director of marketing. The Regal, for example, sells for about $27,000, or about $8,000 to $10,000 less than a similarly sized and equipped -- though much higher-powered -- Lexus ES350 and BMW 3 Series.
That tactic is paying off. "About 40% of our sales are conquests from non-GM brands," McCormack says, indicating that lots of new prospects to Buick are liking what they see. Just as importantly, GM isn't simply cannibalizing sales from Chevrolet and Cadillac, two of its other remaining car brands.
According to TrueCar.com, an automotive buying service, Buick buyers at an average age of 67, were older than any in the industry, as of 2008. But the average has been trending younger lately, mostly because of the Enclave, with an average buyer age of 50. All luxury car manufacturers struggle to win younger customers they hope to convert into repeat buyers.
Image is also an important factor. "A few years ago no one in Southern California wanted to own a Buick. But suddenly there were waiting lists for the Enclave," a big favorite with soccer moms, said Jesse Toprak, TrueCar.com vice president for industry trends. Buick isn't yet a cool brand in Southern California "but the brand has made some headway," he says.
Buick's marketing strategy has been geared to attract a different sort of luxury customer, one that (as in the old days of the brand) isn't trying to make a statement of wealth or class. Just as doctors once avoided Cadillac because it sent the wrong message to patients and neighbors, today's Buick prospects may very well disdain "Master of the Universe" or Wall St. status.
The brand's marketing team chose NCAA sports as a venue for its advertising and created a "highlight reel" of collegiate stars involved in charities meant to help the needy. With former University of North Dakota basketball star Manny Ohonme, originally from Nigeria, Buick contributed more than 2,000 pairs of shoes and socks to children during the 2011 Final Four championship. But Buick still has headway to make in coming up with a sticky tagline that encompasses what the brand stands for.
Because Buick is deliberately side-stepping status-seekers, its engines aren't necessarily chosen for raw horsepower or high amounts of torque. Indeed, its new eAssist system, offered first on the LaCrosse, is meant to improve fuel efficiency by stopping the engine when the car stops at a light or in traffic and using electric assist to help it at speed.
Effort has been applied to cabin quietness, a virtue of Buicks for decades. Engineers studied how to remove or block sounds, and applied high-tech materials to subdue ambient noise. The goal is to allow passengers to converse in a normal speaking voice between front and rear rows while traveling, a small and important factor in a pleasant driving experience.
Buick has miles to go before it is a real challenger to BMW or Mercedes. But for the first time in decades, it has a shot at relevancy. And that may very well vindicate the decision of two U.S. presidents to make sure that GM didn't go out of business.
smoother and quieter than my cousin's 2010 Acura RDX
We should compare vehicles in the same class, i.e. that Cobalt to a Civic, and the RDX to an Equinox or maybe Caddy SRX.
The latter class has twice as many half shafts and a shell that resonates sound like an echo chamber (wagons also do this, but sedans don't).
I had a rental Cobalt coupe for a day and could not wait to send it back. That Cobalt was longer than my Forester in overall length, yet had a subcompact sized interior. Space efficiency was terrible. The engine was coarse and didn't like being revved.
I think you liked your friend and you were being kind, or nostalgic perhaps.
But for the first time in decades, it has a shot at relevancy. And that may very well vindicate the decision of two U.S. presidents to make sure that GM didn't go out of business.
Except there is no vindication. Except if they sold GM stock today, they would lose the taxpayers hard earned money not in the millions, but in the BILLIONS!
Except that they are rewarding incompetence and failure for the elite 1%, and selling out the remaining 99%.
Moral hazard is the best way to get ahead in the USA. Go America, we stand for rewarding failures. 2 US Presidents succeeded in making the worst decision in US history is all I see.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
They can write off the stock entirely and the taxpayers will still come out way ahead. A GM and Chrysler failure could have tipped the country into a depression. We'd be paying out even more in unemployment compensation and welfare benefits than we are now if GM and Chrysler had gone away. Plus foreign manufacturers would have grabbed a lot more market share, further dampening our industrial base.
Comments
Per JD Power, Honda and Ford retain 62%.
Plus, the majority of Pontiac owners bail. I dunno if I'd be bragging about that.
The disloyalty is less bad than other GM brands. "Only" 60% of owners bail, vs. more for other GM brands.
They still have some work to do.
I'm a fan of the self-healing cladding I've had on a few crossovers, so I get that.
Still, to me Saturn was a low-pressure sales model. It would make sense for GM to use a similar no-haggle model to sell certain cars from certain outlets, perhaps.
But invest big in a return of Saturn, and Chevys will go stale like they did in the 90s.
They still have some work to do.
The best way to improve this IMHO is to use their limited resources on making their existing brands and products more excellent. The addition of brands just dilutes attention: "Well, if the buyer ditches the crap at Chevy, perhaps they'll stay in the GM fold by buying Saturn or Pontiac instead". Why not make sure Chevy is so excellent that they retain the buyer in the first place, like Honda and Toyota do more successfully?
I tend to agree. The speedo on the Verano goes over 160 to like 165 or 170. Just a bit optimistic.
I love discussions like this - in ten years, I can still say "just wait". And if there's a GTO special edition in ten years, I can go to "Toot your Horn or Eat Your Hat (or both?)" (assuming I can still remember this thread in two months, much less ten years :shades:)
Hasn't that horse left the barn already?
IMHO there's also a lot of BADwill with all of the brands. Better to clean one or two of them up than restore the other ones. It's not like the GM market share was going up all of those years.
Even then - the modern GTO already failed to sell well. The G8 would sell better as a Caprice SS. Camaro always outsold the Trans Am, didn't it? What name plates do you want to see make a come back?
Saturn? With names like SL1, SC whatever, L200, seriously? Zero value left in those names.
I don't see it....
I agree. GM has yet to flush all of the dogs out of Chevy, GMC, Buick, and Cadillac. GM has a long way to go before they can even think of creating another brand.
Andre likely knows, but my guess is the T/A outsold the Camaro in the late 70's around the time of Smokey and the Bandit. Seems everyone wanted 6.6 and fire chicken decals on the hood;)
It's not the names that made Saturn, it's the no-haggle pricing, and excellent customer service they offered. My sister wouldn't be on her third Saturn if their dealers/service departments weren't as complacent or pathetic as the rest of the GM dealers were (and still are, in most cases).
For instance, the upcoming ZL1 package - poorly named and means nothing to anyone. They didn't even use Z28.
I can imagine Saturn being to Chevy what Scion is to Toyota. Not a full brand, but a subset of small cars targeted at young buyers. The Spark and Sonic could be Saturns. It even sounds catchy - Saturn Spark, Saturn Sonic.
Officially it's Toyota Scion xB, but nobody thinks of them that way, they just say Scion. Could be the same with Saturn/Chevy.
Any why not? They have nothing to lose, when it comes to small cars Chevy keeps tossing out names anyway (Cavalier, Cobalt).
Agreed - and they could bring those back, offer the Spark and Sonic in a sub-brand, with no-haggle pricing (which appeals to first time buyers, older folks like to haggle). Roll out free oil changes for 2 years, which costs next to nothing, and welcome young buyers to GM.
In the 3,800lb 528i it goes 0-60 in under 7 seconds and has an EPA rating of 22/32. Granted it's a 45k+ car. Still, that is impressive.
I'd have to look it up to be sure, but from around 1977-81, I think there might have been a couple years in there that the Firebird/Trans Am outsold the Camaro. I think there were a couple years in there that just the Trans Am alone accounted for more than 100,000 sales. In contrast, in later years, I think the Camaro started concentrating selling more base models and chick-car Berliinettas, rather than the Z/28.
It probably also helped the Firebird's image that you could get a 400/403, an in later years a turbocharged 301, whereas the Camaro was just topping out with a 350.
You've had some good logic points through the discussion on this.
1. Saturn was suffocated with lack of funding after things got going. Using the Saturn name could have some value.
2. Does the name "Saturn" have value with young buyers or with older buyers now in their 30s / 40s?
I think the answer is both. There are many young people driving around in Saturns in our areas. These are Saturns with 2 doors and 4 doors in their economical small car versions. So there's an opportunity to cash in on the cachet of value in the name for many young drivers instead of having Honda benefit from their earliest car being a used Civic.
3. The studies indicated for GM that people buying Saturn wanted "anonymous" character features to their cars. They just wanted cars that blend in. I don't think that is right, but that was what GM had concluded and styling of later Saturns seems to reinforce that, except for the SKY.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
So even back then, you could argue the T/A only did better when Chevy was handicapped with smaller engines.
I still think the ZL1 should be called a Z28 or some blast from the past type of name.
That's probably more due to driving what they can afford vs. driving what they want. My wife used to have an SL2, my MIL had an SL2, and my SIL had an SC1. I don't miss them and I certainly wouldn't want to drive around in one of those penalty boxes today.
In the beginning most Saturn fans liked the fact they weren't run of the mill rebadged GM crap. Once that started, many left. My MIL moved on to Toyota, my SIL has an Acura, and my wife certainly certainly has no desire for another Saturn.
ZL1 certainly doesn't roll off the tongue like Z28, but IIRC, there was a ZL1 package back in the late 60's.
Well, in those days they still tried to differentiate the brands more, so I think the expectation was that a Firebird or Trans Am was supposed to be a better, more expensive car than a Camaro.
That sums it up.
Civic and Corolla are names that have been around forever. People with used ones that go 200k miles will buy a new one at least once, no matter how de-contented and "not-as-good-as-it-used-be" they may be.
Kids driving their mom's old Cavalier or Cobalt are going to wonder why the names don't even exist any more.
GM should bring up successful names from the past. Not all of them - just the nostalgic ones.
Kids driving their mom's old Cavalier or Cobalt are going to wonder why the names don't even exist any more.
I keep coming back to "make the products excellent". Like the Cruze is on the way to doing, and perhaps the Spark as well.
Names are retained (a la Civic/Corolla) when the products are consistently successful. Names are changed (a la Vega/Chevette/Cavalier/Cobalt) when the market does not have a highly positive historical impression.
Make the current GMs excellent, and the kids of today's drivers will remember those names and buy those names 20 years from now. It's a long term business.
And I don't even need Wagoner's $10mill/year to know that. :surprise:
They seem to be doing pretty well with the Malibu. As of 2012, that makes 16 years that the name's been in production. The original Malibu lasted 20 years, from 1964, when it was a top trim level of the Chevelle, through 1983, when it was phased out to make way for the Celebrity.
They have had a few rough patches though, first letting the '97 style go too long without change, and then the 2004-07 model not being "new" enough. They seemed to have gotten it more or less right with the 2008 model though, and even though we're 5 years into that one, I think it's aged fairly well.
Unfortunately, I don't think they've done as well with the Impala. I even remember Edmund's testing a first year 2000 model, and back then they were criticizing it. They said that while the Malibu was "The car you knew America could build", the Impala was "The car you knew American WOULD build" :sick:
The Impala has been improved over the years, but it's just not been enough.
I guess the fact that the Cruze has an all-new name suggests that Chevy has always been weak in small cars. I guess they could've called it "Nova" if they wanted to, though. That's one small (well, okay compact) name that Chevy never really mucked up with a bad model.
That pretty much sums it up. The Cruze has proven that if the product is good, people will buy it. Ford, Chrysler, and GM have improved market share due to offering better product.
See what I mean? You can bring back a name without the expense of a full brand.
And ... if they put those names only on models WORTHY of nostalgia, it would work even better.
No fair to slap the Nova name on every rental car they sell to Budget. Save it JUST for the turbo model. The engine is headed for the Verano, so it would cost next to nothing to do it.
I think I remember reading that the lady in charge of design at GM had to fight against the beancounters to upcontent the interior of the Cruze. And look at what a good decision that was. They still have to fight against all the old mistakes they used to make (too many mediocre brands, models, cheapness, etc.).
No question. IMO, the Impala wasn't competitive in '00 let alone '06. The 07 refresh didn't do much. Sure, it looks better, but currently the Impala is a turd. Other than being able to buy one cheap, I don't know why anyone would aspire to own it. I'm willing to bet if you asked most of the people who drive them (if it's not a company car or rental), the most popular response will be "I got it cheap".
My wife had an 01 Impala. I found it ugly inside and out with below average build quality. In essence it was a typical GM product in the early '00s.
The new Impala can't come soon enough. At least the Malibu is good enough and the new one looks nice.
Saturn Spark
Saturn Sonic
Chevy Cruze Nova (2.0T, DI, high boost)
Chevy Camaro Z28 (instead of ZL1 name)
Chevy Impala SS (V8 only, from the cop car package)
We just brought back 4 nostalgic names in a proper manner, for little/no cost.
They weren't exactly reliable, but at least the name hasn't become toxic, IMO at least, like Corvair, Vega, Chevette, Citation, and Cavalier have.
I liked the clam shell fastback, even if I didn't fit in it very well, but didn't care for the formal roof sedan all that much. Actually, Monza goes back to the upscale Corvair model. The mid to late 60's ones were very nice cars.
She ultimately got a 1980 Malibu coupe, but she at least granted my wish, in getting a blue one!
That could be the criteria for brining back a discontinued car name - do they still make scale models of that car?
Impala - probably yes.
Lumina - not likely.
I think those kids will save 99% of their wonder to why their Mom ever bought that load of crap in the first place, rather than why the name doesn't exist anymore.
It is plainly obvious to me why they don't try to sell "Neons" anymore. I don't have to wonder about that. Though I do wonder why people buy Calibers just because the name isn't a Neon it still is a Neon for the most part.
It started life as the Mitsubishi Outlander, but then the Dodge Caliber, Jeep Compass, and Patriot joined it. Also, I hadn't realized this before, but according to Wikipedia (so take with a grain of salt) the Mitsubishi Lancer, Dodge Journey, and even the Dodge Avenger and Chrysler Sebring (now the 200) owe some of their existence to this platform.
Personally, I think they made a mistake replacing the Neon with the Caliber. The Caliber is sort of a small wagon/hatch/crossover type thing, so it would compete more with something ilke a Toyota Matrix/Pontiac Vibe or a Ford Focus wagon, which is definitely a slightly more nichey market than a mainstream small sedan. It was also a lot more expensive than the Neon, and not as fuel efficient.
Now, I'm not giving the Neon a free pass here. I think they should have done something to improve the car. I actually liked it because it was one of the few small cars I could fit comfortably in, both front and rear. But, they really needed to throw a little more money into the interior. And stop doing stupid stuff like when you ordered power windows, you only got power for the front, and the rears were still crank. That's just cheap. And while the R/T models could be good performers, they really needed to do something with the lesser models. 132 hp was phenomenal for a base engine in this class when the car came out in early 1994. But by 2005, the final year, it was only so-so.
My son bought a 2000 Cavalier and put 200k trouble free miles on it. It cost $10,500 new. He then bought a 2007 Cobalt which he has now and has been a great car. It's at about 75K and the only repair has been a left front wheel bearing and a set of tires.
By the way I rode in and drove the Cobalt on a 400 mile trip to visit my brother in VA. I found it comfortable and quiet and it had plenty of pep with the standard motor. It got great mileage on the road - around 35 mpg. I found it to be smoother and quieter than my cousin's 2010 Acura RDX.
I always thought the Cav hit its peak around 1988-90. The '88 restyle was a major improvement, and the cars actually seemed nice inside! But, they cheapened them somewhat around 1991-94.
Motortrend or C&D made a comment about the 1995 era Cavalier being a much improved car almost to the point that it made the 2nd-generation Saturn S-series redundant. To me though, it felt like more cost-cutting, and the 1995+ Cavalier didn't feel as comfortable inside to me. It felt more cramped.
I know the Cobalt got mainly mediocre-to-negative reviews, but I liked the few that I've sat in at auto shows. It actually felt like it fit my body better than any car in its class...good legroom, a footwell that's not too crowded, etc. Now, that did come at the expense of back seat room, but for a solo commuter, or if I only have two other people in the car (and the front seat passenger isn't too tall) it probably would make a decent car.
A for a kid wondering about getting Mom's old Cavalier or Cobalt, the little brat shouldn't complain about getting a free car. If I got a free car from my parents and I complained about it, Dad would smack me upside the head, use a few choice expletives, and take the keys away.
Moody's Investors Service raised the bond ratings of Ford and General Motors to the cusp of investment grade, citing new U.S. labor contracts that preserve the automakers' cost positions, Bloomberg News reports. Both automakers saw their bond ratings fall to junk status six years ago as their outlook continued to degrade.
Trash to Treasure
Well, at least their cars are FINALLY ahead of the curve regarding "Junk Status"!
Regards,
OW
While the parts and pieces might have different manufacturer model numbers/names, the car still gets the same low CR scores for quality, reliability and so on and so forth. It also comes from the same company.
The PT Cruiser shared the same platform and parts and pieces I believe. Didn't take long for poor reliability to take that "fad" away.
Wow, then why in the world are RDX's selling for MORE than Cobalt's and Cavaliers? Surely Acura doesn't hypnotize people into buying their cars.
Maybe he has summer performance tires on the RDX which can be loud and harsh on some roads. I think the RDX takes any Cobalt short of the SS in a race with one hand tied behind the driver's back.
Buick is paying dividends for GM
October 31, 2011: 5:00 AM ET Treasury officials considered shutting down GM's also-ran luxury brand in 2009. Now, the decision not to is looking brilliant.
By Doron Levin, contributor
FORTUNE -- U.S. Treasury officials weren't sure in 2009 whether General Motors ought to shut down its Buick division as part of the government-sponsored bankruptcy. Their decision to hang on to the brand is looking better by the day.
Buick (GM) sales in the U.S. soared 48% in 2010 from 2009 on the strength of the fullsize LaCrosse sedan and Enclave crossover and another 24% this year following the successful introduction of the smaller Regal sedan.
The latest entry, dubbed Verano, will be arriving shortly to Buick's 2,100 dealers and it looks like a strong contender as well. The Verano intends to compete among higher-end compacts; it features the same architecture as the Chevrolet Cruze and Opel Astra, with lots of tweaks, rakish lines, high-fashion touches and advanced engineering to give it a more luxurious feel.
GM, with its Buick brand, is turning the tables on more prestigious brands such as Toyota's (TM) Lexus and BMW by offering premium features at a more competitive price, according to Roger McCormack, Buick director of marketing. The Regal, for example, sells for about $27,000, or about $8,000 to $10,000 less than a similarly sized and equipped -- though much higher-powered -- Lexus ES350 and BMW 3 Series.
That tactic is paying off. "About 40% of our sales are conquests from non-GM brands," McCormack says, indicating that lots of new prospects to Buick are liking what they see. Just as importantly, GM isn't simply cannibalizing sales from Chevrolet and Cadillac, two of its other remaining car brands.
According to TrueCar.com, an automotive buying service, Buick buyers at an average age of 67, were older than any in the industry, as of 2008. But the average has been trending younger lately, mostly because of the Enclave, with an average buyer age of 50. All luxury car manufacturers struggle to win younger customers they hope to convert into repeat buyers.
Image is also an important factor. "A few years ago no one in Southern California wanted to own a Buick. But suddenly there were waiting lists for the Enclave," a big favorite with soccer moms, said Jesse Toprak, TrueCar.com vice president for industry trends. Buick isn't yet a cool brand in Southern California "but the brand has made some headway," he says.
Buick's marketing strategy has been geared to attract a different sort of luxury customer, one that (as in the old days of the brand) isn't trying to make a statement of wealth or class. Just as doctors once avoided Cadillac because it sent the wrong message to patients and neighbors, today's Buick prospects may very well disdain "Master of the Universe" or Wall St. status.
The brand's marketing team chose NCAA sports as a venue for its advertising and created a "highlight reel" of collegiate stars involved in charities meant to help the needy. With former University of North Dakota basketball star Manny Ohonme, originally from Nigeria, Buick contributed more than 2,000 pairs of shoes and socks to children during the 2011 Final Four championship. But Buick still has headway to make in coming up with a sticky tagline that encompasses what the brand stands for.
Because Buick is deliberately side-stepping status-seekers, its engines aren't necessarily chosen for raw horsepower or high amounts of torque. Indeed, its new eAssist system, offered first on the LaCrosse, is meant to improve fuel efficiency by stopping the engine when the car stops at a light or in traffic and using electric assist to help it at speed.
Effort has been applied to cabin quietness, a virtue of Buicks for decades. Engineers studied how to remove or block sounds, and applied high-tech materials to subdue ambient noise. The goal is to allow passengers to converse in a normal speaking voice between front and rear rows while traveling, a small and important factor in a pleasant driving experience.
Buick has miles to go before it is a real challenger to BMW or Mercedes. But for the first time in decades, it has a shot at relevancy. And that may very well vindicate the decision of two U.S. presidents to make sure that GM didn't go out of business.
We should compare vehicles in the same class, i.e. that Cobalt to a Civic, and the RDX to an Equinox or maybe Caddy SRX.
The latter class has twice as many half shafts and a shell that resonates sound like an echo chamber (wagons also do this, but sedans don't).
I had a rental Cobalt coupe for a day and could not wait to send it back. That Cobalt was longer than my Forester in overall length, yet had a subcompact sized interior. Space efficiency was terrible. The engine was coarse and didn't like being revved.
I think you liked your friend and you were being kind, or nostalgic perhaps.
What's not really discussed in the article is that Buick gained volume by lowering prices and creating incentives.
They're on a roll, though. I just hope the Verano doesn't derail them.
Except there is no vindication. Except if they sold GM stock today, they would lose the taxpayers hard earned money not in the millions, but in the BILLIONS!
Except that they are rewarding incompetence and failure for the elite 1%, and selling out the remaining 99%.
Moral hazard is the best way to get ahead in the USA. Go America, we stand for rewarding failures. 2 US Presidents succeeded in making the worst decision in US history is all I see.
We wouldn't be seeing stories like this either:
GM fulfills promise of $2B in new investments; Michigan receives $738M, nearly 3,000 jobs (mlive.com)