NINETY EIGHT REGENCY

A "What If It Never or If It Happened" at GM Thread

42 posts in this topic

I was thinking last night. I went to the last 20 years or so at GM and was wandering with the knowledge we have now:

1. What GM had got the Fiero right before 1988 and it offered a 3.8 liter V6?

2. What if the fullsized B and C bodies had never switched to front wheel drive?

3. What if the E Bodies( Toronado, Riviera, Eldorado) looked they way they did in 1992 in 1986 when they were initially redesigned?

4. What if the Caprice had been downsized with the other B Bodies in 1986?

5. What if GM had only downsized the B Bodies and left the C Bodies fullsized and rear drive?

7. What if they new Oldsmobile never happened and the:

Ninety Eight and Eighty Eight had been redesigned and switched over to the G Body platform and

8. What if Aurora had been called Toronado?

9. What if the W Bodies had been redesigned as they were in 1988, but stayed rear drive?

10. What if the Cadillac Allante' and Buick Reatta were hits and was rear drive was on the same platform as Corvette in 1993?

11. What if The Bravada had been put on the same platform as Tahoe and Yukon instead of the midsized platform?

12. What if Lucerne never happened and would have been called Park Avenue?

13. What if Intrigue had been called Cutlass Supreme and was rear drive and offered V6's and V8's and came and coupe and sedan form?

14. What if Cadillac had stayed with the names they had and redesigned their cars with the current Cadillac look?

15. What if Oldsmobile still existed and got the new crossover instead of Saturn or GMC ?

16. What if Chevrolet had got the N car platform along with Pontiac, Olds and Buick and that car was called Malibu, and then those cars would have been up sized to compete against Camry and Accord?

17. What if the highly successful 1992 Cadillac Seville/STS would have been rear drive when introduced back then?

18. What if the A Bodies( Celebrity,Ciera, 6000,Century)had been redesign in 1990 or so to complete directly with Camry and Accord?

19. What is Solstice had been called "Fiero"

20. What if the G8 had been called Grand Prix?

21. What if Holden was using American GM styling to sell cars in Australia?

22. What if the Chinese were to help bring Buick Riviera and Park Avenue back?

23. What if The F Bodies had never died, and Firebird and Camaro lived on with a GTO spin off?

24. What if GM had bought SAAB, and made SAAB in European luxury arm of Opel and Vauxhall?

25. What if the Ninety Eight and Eighty Eight and Cadillac Deville and Fleetwood and Buick Park Avenue and LeSabre had looked the way they did in 1992-1996 in the years 1986 and 1987 when they were smaller and not too successful looking?

26. What if Saturn never happened and only appeared now to sell Opels in North America?

Your thoughts and additions?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a whole bushel basket of thought; did you get ANY sleep last night?

I'm going to address only 3, and it's with one answer.

13. What if Intrigue had been called Cutlass Supreme and was rear drive and offered V6's and V8's and came and coupe and sedan form?

14. What if Cadillac had stayed with the names they had and redesigned their cars with the current Cadillac look?

20. What if the G8 had been called Grand Prix?

With today's (enthusiast, at least) mindset, anything older than 2 years old is unquestionably, undeniably, unarguably and clearly; obsolete. Doesn't matter (even for the enthusiasts) if --say-- a platform is any BETTER than the one it replaced, one is NEW!!! and the other... isn't. The funniest thing ever written on these boards is without a doubt 'That's so 2004'.

So... the "old" names on the new cars listed above would only be a detriment of unknown quantity to the successes of those models, IMO.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not trying to be facetious here, but one could add a list of extraneous factors that would have helped:

1) What if the Arab Oil Embargo never happened.

2) What if Ralph Nader had been killed in a bicycle accident (run over by a Corvair?)

3) What if Roger Smith had gone into, say, flower arranging instead?

4) What if the Allies decided NOT to rebuild the German and Japanese economies, allowing them total access to our shores?

5) What if oil prices doubled in 1995, thus killing off the SUV/truck craze that distracted Detroit for the next 10 years?

6) What if someone in the RenCen took a look at the '87 Acura Legend and said, "Holy $h!! These guys are onto something!"

7) What if Henry Ford had listened to his advisors and brought out the Model A earlier, and made quicker model changes?

8) What if the Germans invented the bomb first, nuked New York, the Russians over-ran Europe and we are all driving Ladas now?

9) For that matter, what if Hitler's art teacher had set him up in his own gallery?

10) What if the '57 Chryslers didn't rust out and fall apart? (Plymouth came its closest ever to kicking Ford's ass)

Hey, this is kind of fun............

Oh, one last one:

What if the Russians had run the Cuban embargo??????? (We'd be foraging for roots and berries, instead of worrying about what GM could have done better!)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Even better, what if it had the 2.3 litre high output Quad-4?

2. They would have died earlier. Top selling car around this time was the Taurus.

3. They would have sold a bit better, but still pretty much died out by 1998.

7-8. Names of the models didn't matter, the name of the brand did. Still would have died.

10. If they were hits, it doesn't really matter much which platform they were on does it?

11. It would have sold even less

12. I would sell even less.

13. That's called 1984

14. I don't think much would change

15. If olds still existed, they'd be selling an old W-body, a Bravada, and a G-body.... in short, they'd be Buick.

16. Chevy did get the N-body. The Corsica was on the L-body but it was developed in parallel with the N-bodies. They're essentially identical underneath.

17. If it was highly successful, why does the configuration matter?

18. Would have been pointless because that's what the N-bodies and W-bodies were for. A-bodies were legacy overlap that GM was still producing out of sheer inertia.

19. There would have been much outrage that the Fiero wasn't a true Fiero because it didn't have pop up headlights and an engine in the back regardless of how good the car was. See GTO.

20. It wouldn't sell as well. GP has too much rental stigma. See Taurus.

21. Holden would join it's brother Oldsmobile in the grave.

22. Yay

23. I'd still be wearing a mullet.

24. This "what-if" is happening.... slowly.

25. The Taurus wouldn't have been such a big seller.

26. Olds would still be around selling an old W-body, a Bravada, and a G-body..... in short, they'd be Buick.

Mine:

1. What if, instead of being J-body based, the Cimmeron had been put on the A-body?

2. What if, Cheers and Gears was in charge of GM's advertising instead of whoever they hired this week?

3. What if we lured all the Toyotas in the country, using Fly's Aurora, to some remote section of texas then nuked them? <sorry Fly collateral damage, we'll get you another one>

4. What if GM could manage to cut down the number of platforms used globally even more?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Even better, what if it had the 2.3 litre high output Quad-4?

2. They would have died earlier. Top selling car around this time was the Taurus.

3. They would have sold a bit better, but still pretty much died out by 1998.

7-8. Names of the models didn't matter, the name of the brand did. Still would have died.

10. If they were hits, it doesn't really matter much which platform they were on does it?

11. It would have sold even less

12. I would sell even less.

13. That's called 1984

14. I don't think much would change

15. If olds still existed, they'd be selling an old W-body, a Bravada, and a G-body.... in short, they'd be Buick.

16. Chevy did get the N-body. The Corsica was on the L-body but it was developed in parallel with the N-bodies. They're essentially identical underneath.

17. If it was highly successful, why does the configuration matter?

18. Would have been pointless because that's what the N-bodies and W-bodies were for. A-bodies were legacy overlap that GM was still producing out of sheer inertia.

19. There would have been much outrage that the Fiero wasn't a true Fiero because it didn't have pop up headlights and an engine in the back regardless of how good the car was. See GTO.

20. It wouldn't sell as well. GP has too much rental stigma. See Taurus.

21. Holden would join it's brother Oldsmobile in the grave.

22. Yay

23. I'd still be wearing a mullet.

24. This "what-if" is happening.... slowly.

25. The Taurus wouldn't have been such a big seller.

26. Olds would still be around selling an old W-body, a Bravada, and a G-body..... in short, they'd be Buick.

Mine:

1. What if, instead of being J-body based, the Cimmeron had been put on the A-body?

2. What if, Cheers and Gears was in charge of GM's advertising instead of whoever they hired this week?

3. What if we lured all the Toyotas in the country, using Fly's Aurora, to some remote section of texas then nuked them? <sorry Fly collateral damage, we'll get you another one>

4. What if GM could manage to cut down the number of platforms used globally even more?

Very good. That is was great. See my other thread about the global GM cars and you will see that is happening. :

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...showtopic=18802

I know the Chevys were on the L Body, but if they had started out on the N Body instead.. As far as the Intrigue comment, the styling from the Intrigue would have existed, and that car would have been called Cutlass. Cadillac with an A Body?? That would have looked really funny. It did exist. It was called Pontiac 6000 STE.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3) What if Roger Smith had gone into, say, flower arranging instead?

Stunned by the company's first loss in years, he would try to cut costs by using only a few kinds of flowers, but try to pass each of them off as four or five different ones, hoping no one would notice. He would later buy out other companies that have absolutely nothing to do with flower arranging. His marketshare continues to slip and instead of improving the quality of his flower arrangements, he just fires people to further cut costs.

Oh, and GM would still have at least 30% of the market, have more American factories and Michigan's economy wouldn't be so far in the &#036;h&#33;ter.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if donkeys had wings and could fly? :AH-HA_wink:

Then portuguese motorways would be even more dangerous. :smilewide:
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other news, a 32 car pileup slowed traffic to a halt today. The driver of the vehicle that started the incident report seeing a donkey flying overhead and soon after soon afterward found his windshield covered with a generous pile of poop. Unable to see out of his windshield and the wipers only making matters worse, he swerved wildly about the road until finally coming to a stop outside of a nearby shoelace factory. The driver is currently undergoing a mental health evaluation at the local hospital and will stand trial this Friday. Back to you, Karen.

Apparently you've never had a goose &#036;h&#33; on your windshield! It could pass for a flying dockey.......

But back to Roger Smith....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few quickies....something more comprehensive probably (and answers to earlier ones) later on.

A. What if the infamous X-cars of the early 80s or the Celebrity & Co. A-bodies were evolved from the Monza & Co. H-body?

B. What if the J-car was really the second generation H-body (again, evolution of that chassis as opposed to a frontie switch)?

C. What if there were 4-door H-bodies in the 70s?

D. What if the H-body was a world architecture back then?

E. What if the GM rotaries made it to the market?

OK, I better skate. More fun after I have dinner.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. What if GM had waited on releasing the 1997 Era Minivans for a year or two more to make a better product?

2. What if this aforementioned vehicle had the 3800 SII?

3. What if the J-Body was refined a bit more in 1995?

Edited by vonVeezelsnider
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3. What if the J-Body was refined a bit more in 1995?

It would still have been a 15 year old platform

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. What if GM had waited on releasing the 1997 Era Minivans for a year or two more to make a better product?

2. What if this aforementioned vehicle had the 3800 SII?

3. What if the J-Body was refined a bit more in 1995?

1. When the Venture came out in '97, it was better than everything on the market, except the Chrysler minivans. Remember, the Windstar had come out the year before and Ford had made the mistake of not allowing for dual sliding doors. Ford also tried to split the difference, as did the Sienna in '98, by making one (smaller) size fit all. When the 3rd generation Chrysler vans hit the market in '96, with the availability of dual sliders, it took even Chrysler by surprise. The Venture was made available with dual doors, but Ford didn't follow suit for a couple years. Remember, this was an era when the Odyssey was an small oddity and the Toyota minivans were smaller as well. Once again, the highly vaunted Japanese didn't figure out the minivans until much later, and it is to GM and Ford's eternal shame that they dropped the ball and handed their market share to the Japanese.

By 2000 (when they finally moved those damned cupbholders!), the Venture was the best minivan on the market. The split 3rd bench that folded and flipped, along with the availabilty of the 3 small flip and fold buckets in the middle row, plus standard ABS and side air bags were leagues ahead of Chrysler while the Japanese were still pre-occupied with their reverse engineering to catch up. Alas, the Venture dragged on for far too many model years. It should have been wholly replaced in 2003 or 2004 with a credible update; the Uplander was fine as a stopgap measure - but, now, I would be the first to admit that the Uplander is a joke, except for the fact that it is $10k cheaper than a Sienna. So, yes, the ugly VALUE pricing is necessary to move them out the door. Americans may not care, but the minivan market is a big market up here. We sell more Uplanders in a month than Tahoes in a year!

2. The 3800 is a gas guzzler. It was available on the dustbusters, but not a popular upgrade. The 3400 was a fine engine for the van - REMEMBER: THIS IS A MINIVAN, NOT A DRAGSTER! But, of course, under the category of TYRANNY OF THE ENTHUSIASTS, we are seeing a silly horsepower race in the minivans, too.

3. Much can be said of the J-body as well. In '95, they were a pretty decent car, save for the availability of those UGLY plastic bumpers, and possibily the ugliest fabric on the car seats in history. (Maybe not, I remember AMC had black and white checkerboard vinyl/cloth in their Hornets - and those were uglier!) Anyway, if the Cavalier had received a major facelift in 2000 (with the ecotec 3 years earlier) and the new Cavalier (Cobalt) available in '03, Mazda and Honda would not nearly own that market like they do now.

None of these vehicles were BAD, they just hung around too long. It was getting embarassing when people were coming out of 3 or 4 year leases and the only changes to the newer version of their car was seat fabric and wheel covers! As I pointed out earlier, if gas prices had doubled in '95, GM and Ford wouldn't have been counting their cash selling every SUV they could build and MAY have spent the development money on their small and mid-sized vehicles instead. MAYBE.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since there's brand new posts since my last one, I continue here. Answers to older ones will be in yet another:

We're gonna begin by switching H-bodies (to the frontie standard of recent years)

F. What if the H-bodies of Bonneville & Co. were available with all-wheel-drive? Ditto W, N, and J-bodies.

G. What if GM had offered H, W, and N-body wagons?

H. What if the H-bodies had V-8s in the 80s?

I. What if GM pulled what Ford did with the Mustang and the 3rd generation F-bodies got smaller? Based on, you guessed it, the H-body (the original rear-drive chassis).

J. What if the turbocharged Quad-4 had happened?

K. What if one of the American divisions (say, Pontiac) deviated from the rest of GMNA and offered the Carlton/Omega (back in the laste 80s)?

L. What if Pontiac had stuck with the OHC straight six from the late 60s?

M. What if Pontiac had offered a 78-81 A-body GTO?

N. What if the Calibra and Vectra/cavalier were offered in the U.S.?

O. What if the T-car (Chevette and T1000 here in North America) had a model for the burgeoning hot hatch movement to go against the GTI and Omni GLH?

P. What if GM kept Lotus?

Q. What if Isuzu stuck to cars?

R. What if the GM80 or Beretta really DID replace the F-body back in the 80s?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F. What if the H-bodies of Bonneville & Co. were available with all-wheel-drive? Ditto W, N, and J-bodies.

Extrapolating on that, what if Pontiac as a whole featured AWD across the entire line, even Firebird and GTO?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I can say for the Venture, having had three back to back, and a lone 3800 Dustbuster prior, I'd say that the 3400 is more than adequate, but I wouldn't say that the 3800 SI was a gas guzzler in the lighter van (I'll shut up about the magical 40MPG HWY Dustbuster now.), but it's an engine that strikes me as more durable than the 3.4L. These vans got a terrible reputation for reliability and that is something that can't be denied. Out of the three we owned, the first one (A 1999 LS) struck me as the most well constructed by far- they all had their quirks but there were far less problems overall in the '99. Getting into the 2002, I could tell things went downhill a bit- sure it had the fancy fold flat bench, but it didn't have some other features such as a pollen filter, or adjustable lumbar- the little things, you know. The upholstery quality took a dive big time... The 2002 and 2005 both had leaky roofs near the front windshield that stained the headliner... it was poorly sealed at the factory and couldn't be corrected after nearly 10 returns to the dealership for both vans combined. I mean jeez... I was told in private by the service manager that there was a service bulletin about this in 2003 and nothing, Nothing was done to correct it- still happening in 2005. I mean JEEZ ALOO, 3 model years and they haven't solved a leaky roof on god knows how many vans!

I'm not calling them unreliable crap though, that's my grandfather's 2001 Caravan Sport aka Christine.

Edited by vonVeezelsnider
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy cow ... that, my friends, is a lot of thinking and wondering.

Too bad we can't change some of it.....

*sighs*

What if the Monte Carlo had never been produced, starting in 1970?

Cort:33swm."Mr Monte Carlo.Mr Road Trip".pig valve.pacemaker

WRMNshowcase.lego.HO.model.MCs.RT.CHD = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort

"Maybe we've been living with our eyes half open" ... Switchfoot ... 'Meant To Live'

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if the Monte Carlo had never been produced, starting in 1970?

You'd definitely have a different avatar :P.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. When the Venture came out in '97, it was better than everything on the market, except the Chrysler minivans. Remember, the Windstar had come out the year before and Ford had made the mistake of not allowing for dual sliding doors. Ford also tried to split the difference, as did the Sienna in '98, by making one (smaller) size fit all. When the 3rd generation Chrysler vans hit the market in '96, with the availability of dual sliders, it took even Chrysler by surprise. The Venture was made available with dual doors, but Ford didn't follow suit for a couple years. Remember, this was an era when the Odyssey was an small oddity and the Toyota minivans were smaller as well. Once again, the highly vaunted Japanese didn't figure out the minivans until much later, and it is to GM and Ford's eternal shame that they dropped the ball and handed their market share to the Japanese.

By 2000 (when they finally moved those damned cupbholders!), the Venture was the best minivan on the market. The split 3rd bench that folded and flipped, along with the availabilty of the 3 small flip and fold buckets in the middle row, plus standard ABS and side air bags were leagues ahead of Chrysler while the Japanese were still pre-occupied with their reverse engineering to catch up. Alas, the Venture dragged on for far too many model years. It should have been wholly replaced in 2003 or 2004 with a credible update; the Uplander was fine as a stopgap measure - but, now, I would be the first to admit that the Uplander is a joke, except for the fact that it is $10k cheaper than a Sienna. So, yes, the ugly VALUE pricing is necessary to move them out the door. Americans may not care, but the minivan market is a big market up here. We sell more Uplanders in a month than Tahoes in a year!

2. The 3800 is a gas guzzler. It was available on the dustbusters, but not a popular upgrade. The 3400 was a fine engine for the van - REMEMBER: THIS IS A MINIVAN, NOT A DRAGSTER! But, of course, under the category of TYRANNY OF THE ENTHUSIASTS, we are seeing a silly horsepower race in the minivans, too.

3. Much can be said of the J-body as well. In '95, they were a pretty decent car, save for the availability of those UGLY plastic bumpers, and possibily the ugliest fabric on the car seats in history. (Maybe not, I remember AMC had black and white checkerboard vinyl/cloth in their Hornets - and those were uglier!) Anyway, if the Cavalier had received a major facelift in 2000 (with the ecotec 3 years earlier) and the new Cavalier (Cobalt) available in '03, Mazda and Honda would not nearly own that market like they do now.

None of these vehicles were BAD, they just hung around too long. It was getting embarassing when people were coming out of 3 or 4 year leases and the only changes to the newer version of their car was seat fabric and wheel covers! As I pointed out earlier, if gas prices had doubled in '95, GM and Ford wouldn't have been counting their cash selling every SUV they could build and MAY have spent the development money on their small and mid-sized vehicles instead. MAYBE.

I have to take issue with the Venture being better than the Caravan...I'll prove my point with it's twin, the Montana and a Caravan.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't watch that video and drive in the van on the same day. Let's keep in mind that the Montana crash test you linked is a IIHS test and the Caravan one is NHTSA, their tests are different and the IIHS one is more realistic too most accident situations.

Here is a link to the IIHS comparable test for the Caravan:

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=59

Still better than Venture IMO

Edited by vonVeezelsnider
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to take issue with the Venture being better than the Caravan...I'll prove my point with it's twin, the Montana and a Caravan.

:withstupid:

You'd have to pay me to ride in a Montana/Venture/Silhouette. Same with a Blazer/Jimmy/Bravada and an Astro/Safari.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't watch that video and drive in the van on the same day. Let's keep in mind that the Montana crash test you linked is a IIHS test and the Caravan one is NHTSA, their tests are different and the IIHS one is more realistic too most accident situations.

Here is a link to the IIHS comparable test for the Caravan:

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=59

Still better than Venture IMO

Yeah, it still held up better. Also we have to consider than the current minivan, which is far safer than both was around in 2004 when these GM vans were still being made.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it still held up better. Also we have to consider than the current minivan, which is far safer than both was around in 2004 when these GM vans were still being made.

Amazingly, to the IIHS, that's poor-acceptable, doesn't look like it's that bad either. Maybe they should have created a new category for the GM Vans called "OWNED" :P.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazingly, to the IIHS, that's poor-acceptable, doesn't look like it's that bad either. Maybe they should have created a new category for the GM Vans called "OWNED" :P.

:lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beware, longish post coming up. Go pour your drinks, use the bathroom, or whatever before reading.....

Gonna have to do this Balthazar style (since quote blocks won't be allowed)...

NINETY EIGHT REGENCY:

"I was thinking last night. I went to the last 20 years or so at GM and was wandering with the knowledge we have now:

1. What GM had got the Fiero right before 1988 and it offered a 3.8 liter V6?"

Might have been a bit much for the chassis (like too wide for instance). Better would have been the Fiero making it to the turbocharged 2.8 or the Twin-Dual Cam V-6. What might have been if they had built that second-generation '89.

"2. What if the fullsized B and C bodies had never switched to front wheel drive?"

Still would have had to downsize somehow. Perhaps they would have considered the Senator or Commodore chassis sooner.

"4. What if the Caprice had been downsized with the other B Bodies in 1986?"

If you mean switching to the H, sayonara police sales, sayonara eventual Impala SS.

"5. What if GM had only downsized the B Bodies and left the C Bodies fullsized and rear drive?"

They were all full-size cars. It would have been much worse. Quite honestly most of those big monsters had to go. It was good for Pontiac.

"7. What if they new Oldsmobile never happened and the:

Ninety Eight and Eighty Eight had been redesigned and switched over to the G Body platform"

Which G?

"8. What if Aurora had been called Toronado?"

Confusion.

"9. What if the W Bodies had been redesigned as they were in 1988, but stayed rear drive?"

Appreciated much better by enthusiasts.

"10. What if the Cadillac Allante' and Buick Reatta were hits and was rear drive was on the same platform as Corvette in 1993?"

Great Caddy and Buick. One pissed off Corvette team.

"11. What if The Bravada had been put on the same platform as Tahoe and Yukon instead of the midsized platform?"

Overkill.

"12. What if Lucerne never happened and would have been called Park Avenue?"

Under the radar.....WAY under the radar.

"13. What if Intrigue had been called Cutlass Supreme and was rear drive and offered V6's and V8's and came and coupe and sedan form?"

See above answer #9, plus Olds would have had a real dilemma.

"14. What if Cadillac had stayed with the names they had and redesigned their cars with the current Cadillac look?"

Wouldn't have taken their cachet up to the level it is now. Perception counts for a lot. See Lucerne answer.

"15. What if Oldsmobile still existed and got the new crossover instead of Saturn or GMC?"

Business as usual.

"16. What if Chevrolet had got the N car platform along with Pontiac, Olds and Buick and that car was called Malibu, and then those cars would have been up sized to compete against Camry and Accord?"

That's basically exactly what happened....

"17. What if the highly successful 1992 Cadillac Seville/STS would have been rear drive when introduced back then?"

Appreciated much better and would have led to what you were hinting at in #14.

"18. What if the A Bodies (Celebrity, Ciera, 6000, Century) had been redesign in 1990 or so to complete directly with Camry and Accord?"

GM would have had way too many compacts (Camcord were a LOT smaller back then)

"20. What if the G8 had been called Grand Prix?"

Crapshoot. Car ain't even out yet. We'll never know.

"21. What if Holden was using American GM styling to sell cars in Australia?"

If you're speaking on Commodore & Co., business as usual. The intermediates and compacts may likely have done nothing.

"22. What if the Chinese were to help bring Buick Riviera and Park Avenue back?"

It's probably how it's going to go down in the real world. Extra sales for a division always help the business case.

"23. What if The F Bodies had never died, and Firebird and Camaro lived on with a GTO spin off?"

The game would have been quite interesting.

Though, to be honest, they needed to die, if only for a true design redirection. Got sick of the same damn Vette-ish fastback look.

"24. What if GM had bought SAAB, and made SAAB in European luxury arm of Opel and Vauxhall?"

Stupidity. Saab should be doing its own thing, period. Spin it off.

"25. What if the Ninety Eight and Eighty Eight and Cadillac Deville and Fleetwood and Buick Park Avenue and LeSabre had looked the way they did in 1992-1996 in the years 1986 and 1987 when they were smaller and not too successful looking?"

Absolute game changers.

"26. What if Saturn never happened and only appeared now to sell Opels in North America?"

Overkill. Like I said elsewhere, Opel is the Chevy of the markets it sells in. All Opels can easily be Chevrolets.

On to Oldsmoboi's:

"1. What if, instead of being J-body based, the Cimmeron had been put on the A-body?"

Still a victim of bad perception. GM of these times would not have tuned it the way it needed to be.

"4. What if GM could manage to cut down the number of platforms used globally even more?"

Brazil, Mexico and other such markets would eternally have new cars. Daewoo would likely only design A and B-segment cars.

Lastly, vonVeezelsnider:

"1. What if GM had waited on releasing the 1997 Era Minivans for a year or two more to make a better product?"

Probably still woud have done the wrong thing. The gray rubber era was real and long in the tooth.

"3. What if the J-Body was refined a bit more in 1995?"

Same basic design from 1982. It was time for something different then. What was done in '95 should have happened in '87.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor