I'm glad I'm not the only one who gets that '61 Plymouth reference. I was actually thinking about it when I mentioned the '61 DeSoto syndrome.
Hate to say it, but even the 2013 Altima makes me think of that Plymouth, just a little. I think just about any modern vehicle that has extremely jagged edges around the grille is going to.
Just imagine how hard it must have been to be a Plymouth dealer in 1961. The '61 Chevy looked just about perfect, with its youthful, sporty flair, while the '61 Ford was a handsome choice for someone who wanted a more conservative car. And there was even competition from within, as Dodge's Dart lineup matched the big Plymouths model for model, and was much more handsome. Or at least, much less ugly!
On the plus side, those Plymouths were good handlers and decent performers. And, provided you could keep the rust off of them, pretty solid.
Oh, and while I'm on an old Mopar kick, it looks like Honda has the '57-60 Dodge covered, with the latest Odyssey minivan. The beltline reminds me of how Dodge used to start the tailfin early on, but then end it short of the back of the car. It became most pronounced, IMO, with the 1960 Polara/Matador.
It seems funky grilles and front end treatments are the new fad. I guess the design community ran out of ideas for greenhouse design, and has moved on. Of course, it's an easy place for LED jewelry, too.
Exner's excess certainly hit a zenith for 61, no wonder Mopars from that year are rare. That year the GM lineup as a whole was pretty nice, you could also get a Cadillac that technically had 4 tailfins, and Lincoln was the new elegance.
I'm liking the direction this is taking. Maybe the next Venza will just be a modern version of a 57 Plymouth Custom Suburban! Don't forget the push button tranny!
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Original WRX has some support as later versions changed, and not for the better - designs being bland or weird, and everyone always develops a fondness for the first model.
C'mon Fin, give Exner a break. He got a little out there toward the end, but at least his designs were symetrical. The Puke, I mean Juke is just plain bizzare to me. I don't think that even in 1958 the US had any vehicle as strange looking as that Nissan.
Now that we have time to cheer GM's positive IQS achievements, let's not loose sight of the reality:
3 Reasons to Worry About General Motors
Reason No. 1: Is this product renaissance for real? GM has been working hard to bring its game up to the same level. So far, the results have been promising: The Chevy Cruze is a good, solid compact, probably GM's best-ever; the new Sonic subcompact is seeing strong sales in a tough segment; and upcoming models like the Chevy Impala and Cadillac ATS look very good so far.
But, while the results have been promising, they haven't been great. The Cruze is a very good car, arguably better than Toyota's (NYSE: TM ) current Corolla -- no small achievement -- but the category has moved forward, and Ford's Focus and Hyundai's (OTC: HYMTF) Elantra have both outshined the Cruze in comparisons. Likewise, the Sonic is also very good -- but it isn't in danger of making people forget Honda's (NYSE: HMC ) much-acclaimed Fit.
In a nutshell, CEO Dan Akerson's goal is to make GM the biggest, best, and most profitable car company in the world, period. If he can do for GM what Ford CEO Alan Mulally has done for his company, he'll get there -- or at least far closer than anyone would have expected a few years ago. But, to do that, GM's cars and trucks have to be awesome -- better than everyone expects, and at least as good as the world's best. That won't be easy: Ford is at the top of its product game, Toyota is determined to come back strong after a couple of difficult years, and Volkswagen (OTC: VLKAY) is on a global roll -- and determined to steal the global sales crown that belonged to GM for years.
GM is expected to release a slew of new models over the next couple of years. Will they be as good as they need to be? Early results are promising, but GM's long history of mediocrity means that the jury is still out.
Reason No. 2: The problem of GM's culture remains Ford's products got better in part because CEO Alan Mulally was able to accomplish what many thought impossible: He cut out layers of management, got rid of recalcitrant leaders, and changed Ford's culture from a morass of warring fiefdoms to a lean, focused machine.
Ford is a sprawling global giant, but nowadays it seems to speak with a single voice and act with a single vision. That's Mulally's signal achievement -- and it's one that Akerson is working hard to emulate.
But Akerson's job is a lot harder. GM is a lot bigger than Ford and it was much more broken. Here's just one example: According to some accounts, GM didn't even have workable internal financial controls before former CFO Chris Liddell took charge after GM's bankruptcy.
Think about that. GM's leadership didn't have a clear understanding of how the money was flowing within the company. And they were OK with that.
That's what Akerson has to fix, top to bottom, throughout a vast global organization. From all appearances, he has made progress. But getting GM's rank and file to really buy into the vision of transformation is going to be a long job -- and if it doesn't get done right, GM will almost certainly slide back into mediocrity.
Reason No. 3: No, it's not Europe I've written extensively about the money-losing mess that is GM Europe. GM Europe, and specifically GM subsidiary Adam Opel AG, is going to be difficult to fix -- but I'm reasonably confident that it will get fixed sometime in the next few years. While it will take longer than Akerson would like, he's making the right moves and it'll happen.
That's not a real reason to worry about GM. Here's a real reason: The General's market share is falling here at home. GM led the world in total sales last year, thanks in big part to its market-leading position in China, but its per-sale profits in China are a fraction of what GM makes on every vehicle it sells here at home.
The bulk of GM's sales may now be overseas, but the vast majority of its profits are generated here in the U.S. And GM's U.S. market share is falling -- just 17.8% for the year through May, compared to almost 20% for the same period last year.
Part of the problem is that many of GM's models are looking long in the tooth -- and that's a problem that will be addressed over the next couple of years, as the slew of new models arrives at dealers. But again, part of the problem is that the competition has stepped up its game.
Long story short: Where is GM really going? Here's the whole thing in a nutshell: GM came out of its high-speed bankruptcy restructuring with a lot of its old problems fixed, but a lot more still needing attention. CEO Dan Akerson has recognized and attacked those problems in a mostly impressive style, all things considered, but there's still a long way to go -- and GM's history gives us several reasons to think that the company might end up reverting to its old, just-functional-enough self.
1958 and Exner designs were bizarre, but also flamboyant and a reflection of the excess of the era. The Juke is just as you say, bizarre, no point to it. A lot of Nissan's stuff is similar, weird for the sake of weird. When you make beige for so long, you have to lash out to get attention.
That's the problem with the CrossCabrio (I think that's the convertible you mean) - it's not small. It's a fairly big heavy and fat looking thing. Pointless. At least the Aztek could be used for camping. I doubt the CrossCabrio will have any following in 10 years.
Not really. Aztec had the Juke front with a dump truck back.
The concept Was interesting. They goofed the execution by starting with a minivan platform.
That and the idiots running GM actually thought they could sell over 70k/yr of those monstrosities. The reality was GM sold less than 1/2 that number and 1/2 of those went to fleets. That's really what gave the Aztec such a bad name. GM thought it would be a hit when they desperately needed one at the time.
As for the CrossCabrio, what a hideous vehicle that is. $40k+ for that?
That should be a good combination. Though the competition is tougher than ever. Will be interesting to see if the new models being introduced will put a dent in Camry sales.
Looks like the fire pictures posted a few months back were rather real, wouldn't you say?
So much for the GM quality system beating the competition.
In April, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration opened an investigation into the Cruze after two engine-compartment fires in model-year 2011 cars, GM said. The agency later added the 2012 model year to its probe, the automaker said.
GM said the recall covers 413,418 Cruzes, or all of the cars sold in the United States since the model's launch in September 2010 through May.
Reminds me of the Camaro launch. Much to do at GM as anyone can plainly see.
GM is also simultaneously executing a second, smaller recall on up to 249 Cruzes that may have partially completed welds in their trunks.
This is not the first time that nearly every Cruze sold to the public has been recalled. In May 2011, GM recalled the Cruze to inspect each unit's intermediate steering shaft covers to ensure they were properly installed.
The Cruze fire recall is large, serious and unfortunate. The steering shaft issue was also a problem the current Hyundai Sonata was recalled for.
But...I won't post a recall of another manufacturer's from six or seven months prior, of a smaller number of cars affected, to attempt to lessen the severity of this recall....as has been done by others here when a GM competitor's recall has been posted.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Well, the numbers being recalled is certainly large, but the fix appears relatively simple, with no new parts required, only modification of the heat shield.
I was reading an article recently (I forget where) discussing how recalls are viewed today. Much of the negativism is based upon the Toyota gas pedal recall, which was serious, but all recalls are not equal.
Of course, critics of ANY brand going under a recall will try to turn a minor issue into a life-or-death one.
Overall, this past week was pretty visible, recall-wise, on several brands.... Chevrolet, Ford, Chrysler, BMW, etc.
Specifically referencing the Cruze issue, I wouldn't let it bother me. The Sonic brake pads missing issue was far more damaging, IMO, simply because it's difficult to explain how something as basic as pads were missed during assembly.
I really doubt the Cruze recall will deter many from looking at the Cruze. Sales on used Jeeps with suspect gas tank design may be affected far more...
Big whoop. If someone is sloppy on an oil change, there might be a little oil hanging on? Sounds like the Honda Civic problem a few years back with oil around the oil filter area.
All they're doing is trimming off a bit of the cover to remove the part that can hold oil and possibly, possibly catch fire?
The 1.4 million cars in toyota World with bad window switches that can catch fire (even when not being use???) would be more of a worry.
Comments
An elegant theme, it aint.
I wonder what the design committee (certainly this is design by more than one, as it is so disjointed) would say as a way to defend that gaping maw.
Where's the roll eyes emotorcon?
Hate to say it, but even the 2013 Altima makes me think of that Plymouth, just a little. I think just about any modern vehicle that has extremely jagged edges around the grille is going to.
Just imagine how hard it must have been to be a Plymouth dealer in 1961. The '61 Chevy looked just about perfect, with its youthful, sporty flair, while the '61 Ford was a handsome choice for someone who wanted a more conservative car. And there was even competition from within, as Dodge's Dart lineup matched the big Plymouths model for model, and was much more handsome. Or at least, much less ugly!
On the plus side, those Plymouths were good handlers and decent performers. And, provided you could keep the rust off of them, pretty solid.
Exner's excess certainly hit a zenith for 61, no wonder Mopars from that year are rare. That year the GM lineup as a whole was pretty nice, you could also get a Cadillac that technically had 4 tailfins, and Lincoln was the new elegance.
I like frog-eye Sprites:
http://motoburg.com/29660-austin-healey-sprite-frogeye.html
My favorite WRX is the 2002 bug eye. When it came out fans were up in arms, now it's a cult classic.
Not sure the Juke will ever get that sort of reception, but...call it bulldog ugly. Some will find the ugliness "cute".
GM got so much backlash for the Aztek that they often don't take enough risks with styling.
Good lord, for some reason, Ann Southern and "My Mother the Car" just popped into my mind. :surprise:
I call the Juke the "deformed toad" :shades:
Like I said, though, that scared them out of taking any risks.
Beige is successful, risk is, well, risky...so I can understand their aversion.
Whenever I see a 2-tier grille design like on the past-gen Honda CRX I a reminded of the '42 Olds.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dmentd1/4774667785/lightbox/
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Puke, I mean Juke is just plain bizzare to me. I don't think that even in 1958 the US had any vehicle as strange looking as that Nissan.3 Reasons to Worry About General Motors
Reason No. 1: Is this product renaissance for real?
GM has been working hard to bring its game up to the same level. So far, the results have been promising: The Chevy Cruze is a good, solid compact, probably GM's best-ever; the new Sonic subcompact is seeing strong sales in a tough segment; and upcoming models like the Chevy Impala and Cadillac ATS look very good so far.
But, while the results have been promising, they haven't been great. The Cruze is a very good car, arguably better than Toyota's (NYSE: TM ) current Corolla -- no small achievement -- but the category has moved forward, and Ford's Focus and Hyundai's (OTC: HYMTF) Elantra have both outshined the Cruze in comparisons. Likewise, the Sonic is also very good -- but it isn't in danger of making people forget Honda's (NYSE: HMC ) much-acclaimed Fit.
In a nutshell, CEO Dan Akerson's goal is to make GM the biggest, best, and most profitable car company in the world, period. If he can do for GM what Ford CEO Alan Mulally has done for his company, he'll get there -- or at least far closer than anyone would have expected a few years ago. But, to do that, GM's cars and trucks have to be awesome -- better than everyone expects, and at least as good as the world's best. That won't be easy: Ford is at the top of its product game, Toyota is determined to come back strong after a couple of difficult years, and Volkswagen (OTC: VLKAY) is on a global roll -- and determined to steal the global sales crown that belonged to GM for years.
GM is expected to release a slew of new models over the next couple of years. Will they be as good as they need to be? Early results are promising, but GM's long history of mediocrity means that the jury is still out.
Reason No. 2: The problem of GM's culture remains
Ford's products got better in part because CEO Alan Mulally was able to accomplish what many thought impossible: He cut out layers of management, got rid of recalcitrant leaders, and changed Ford's culture from a morass of warring fiefdoms to a lean, focused machine.
Ford is a sprawling global giant, but nowadays it seems to speak with a single voice and act with a single vision. That's Mulally's signal achievement -- and it's one that Akerson is working hard to emulate.
But Akerson's job is a lot harder. GM is a lot bigger than Ford and it was much more broken. Here's just one example: According to some accounts, GM didn't even have workable internal financial controls before former CFO Chris Liddell took charge after GM's bankruptcy.
Think about that. GM's leadership didn't have a clear understanding of how the money was flowing within the company. And they were OK with that.
That's what Akerson has to fix, top to bottom, throughout a vast global organization. From all appearances, he has made progress. But getting GM's rank and file to really buy into the vision of transformation is going to be a long job -- and if it doesn't get done right, GM will almost certainly slide back into mediocrity.
Reason No. 3: No, it's not Europe
I've written extensively about the money-losing mess that is GM Europe. GM Europe, and specifically GM subsidiary Adam Opel AG, is going to be difficult to fix -- but I'm reasonably confident that it will get fixed sometime in the next few years. While it will take longer than Akerson would like, he's making the right moves and it'll happen.
That's not a real reason to worry about GM. Here's a real reason: The General's market share is falling here at home. GM led the world in total sales last year, thanks in big part to its market-leading position in China, but its per-sale profits in China are a fraction of what GM makes on every vehicle it sells here at home.
The bulk of GM's sales may now be overseas, but the vast majority of its profits are generated here in the U.S. And GM's U.S. market share is falling -- just 17.8% for the year through May, compared to almost 20% for the same period last year.
Part of the problem is that many of GM's models are looking long in the tooth -- and that's a problem that will be addressed over the next couple of years, as the slew of new models arrives at dealers. But again, part of the problem is that the competition has stepped up its game.
Long story short: Where is GM really going?
Here's the whole thing in a nutshell: GM came out of its high-speed bankruptcy restructuring with a lot of its old problems fixed, but a lot more still needing attention. CEO Dan Akerson has recognized and attacked those problems in a mostly impressive style, all things considered, but there's still a long way to go -- and GM's history gives us several reasons to think that the company might end up reverting to its old, just-functional-enough self.
Regards,
OW
That's the source of the long citation above. A source deserves the citation.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The Isetta was an oddball but it is collectible today.
The concept Was interesting. They goofed the execution by starting with a minivan platform.
Isetta is a different level of odd from a Juke - also tiny, which helps generate interest.
The concept Was interesting. They goofed the execution by starting with a minivan platform.
That and the idiots running GM actually thought they could sell over 70k/yr of those monstrosities. The reality was GM sold less than 1/2 that number and 1/2 of those went to fleets. That's really what gave the Aztec such a bad name. GM thought it would be a hit when they desperately needed one at the time.
As for the CrossCabrio, what a hideous vehicle that is. $40k+ for that?
If I want a roofless SUV it will be a Jeep.
Ambitious. 197hp is good.
Sorry about the double post it won't let me delete the first?
finance.yahoo.com/news/gm-recall-cruze-cars-over-163143404.html
What's funny to me is that the Aztek got the flak while the clad-less Rendezvous got a pass. Never much liked them either.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
They were roomy and cheap. A minivan that didn't look like one.
I remember ads for $24k equipped.
So much for the GM quality system beating the competition.
In April, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration opened an investigation into the Cruze after two engine-compartment fires in model-year 2011 cars, GM said. The agency later added the 2012 model year to its probe, the automaker said.
GM said the recall covers 413,418 Cruzes, or all of the cars sold in the United States since the model's launch in September 2010 through May.
Reminds me of the Camaro launch. Much to do at GM as anyone can plainly see.
Regards,
OW
This is not the first time that nearly every Cruze sold to the public has been recalled. In May 2011, GM recalled the Cruze to inspect each unit's intermediate steering shaft covers to ensure they were properly installed.
OUCH!
Regards,
OW
Oh, that was Chrysler 200s. Oops, I mean Ford Explorers. (Detroit News)
But...I won't post a recall of another manufacturer's from six or seven months prior, of a smaller number of cars affected, to attempt to lessen the severity of this recall....as has been done by others here when a GM competitor's recall has been posted.
I was reading an article recently (I forget where) discussing how recalls are viewed today. Much of the negativism is based upon the Toyota gas pedal recall, which was serious, but all recalls are not equal.
Of course, critics of ANY brand going under a recall will try to turn a minor issue into a life-or-death one.
Overall, this past week was pretty visible, recall-wise, on several brands.... Chevrolet, Ford, Chrysler, BMW, etc.
Specifically referencing the Cruze issue, I wouldn't let it bother me. The Sonic brake pads missing issue was far more damaging, IMO, simply because it's difficult to explain how something as basic as pads were missed during assembly.
I really doubt the Cruze recall will deter many from looking at the Cruze. Sales on used Jeeps with suspect gas tank design may be affected far more...
All they're doing is trimming off a bit of the cover to remove the part that can hold oil and possibly, possibly catch fire?
The 1.4 million cars in toyota World with bad window switches that can catch fire (even when not being use???) would be more of a worry.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,