Camino LS6

It's 1995, and you run GM

37 posts in this topic

What would have been done differently since that time?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should have kept as much independence as possible between the divisions as far as design and keeping competitive and went to a more common engine theme sooner.

Also, made sure Fisher Body employees knew they worked for GM.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kept the B-bodies around, if nothing else but for fleet sales. There was no need to hand that entire segment of the market to Ford on a silver platter after '96. Ask a cop that's been around for a while if he/she has driven both. If they have, ninety-nine times out of a hundred they'll wish they had their Caprice back.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Would have designed cars to exceed the quality of the Japanese cars inside and out
  • Would have never considered selling Hummers
  • Would not have allowed half assed products to go into production
  • Would have made sure each brand was forced
  • Would have made sure as much money and attention was paid to mainstream cars (small, midsize, and large) as the trucks
  • Would have worked towards a balanced portfolio of cars and trucks
  • Would have fired people with personal agendas
  • Worked on the legacy costs
  • Would have made the divisions stop trying to compete with each other
  • Would have killed off badge engineering
  • Would have killed models that overlap
  • Would have worked on RWD Cadillacs to compete with the best of the Germans then
  • Would have already cut Pontiac down to a focused, niche roll
  • Would combine Oldsmobile and Buick lineups to make one complete lineup out of two brands, so they could share showroom space and theoretically Oldsmobile would have a better shot at surviviing
  • Would have paid attention to giving Saab actual product
  • Would have paid attention to Saturn, keeping it's S series updated/redesigned, and focus on small cars
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't have killed the EV1..

Burn in hell, Hummer.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it funny that people hate on Hummer so much, nevermind the fact that it MADE MONEY for GM. IMO, that puts it above some of the other brands in this time frame. IMO, they should have set up hummer to be more easily disposed of when the SUV craze passed, so they'd make the money without the troublesome cleanup.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Would have designed cars to exceed the quality of the Japanese cars inside and out
  • Would have never considered selling Hummers
  • Would not have allowed half assed products to go into production
  • Would have made sure each brand was forced
  • Would have made sure as much money and attention was paid to mainstream cars (small, midsize, and large) as the trucks
  • Would have worked towards a balanced portfolio of cars and trucks
  • Would have fired people with personal agendas
  • Worked on the legacy costs
  • Would have made the divisions stop trying to compete with each other
  • Would have killed off badge engineering
  • Would have killed models that overlap
  • Would have worked on RWD Cadillacs to compete with the best of the Germans then
  • Would have already cut Pontiac down to a focused, niche roll
  • Would combine Oldsmobile and Buick lineups to make one complete lineup out of two brands, so they could share showroom space and theoretically Oldsmobile would have a better shot at surviviing
  • Would have paid attention to giving Saab actual product
  • Would have paid attention to Saturn, keeping it's S series updated/redesigned, and focus on small cars

Guy makes some good points....

I would have sent the 95 Chevy Cavalier back and demanded better!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I find it funny that people hate on Hummer so much, nevermind the fact that it MADE MONEY for GM. IMO, that puts it above some of the other brands in this time frame. IMO, they should have set up hummer to be more easily disposed of when the SUV craze passed, so they'd make the money without the troublesome cleanup.

Very valid point. Very Valid. GM was indeed brilliant for setting this brand up -- from a short term finanical stand point.

I personally dislike the brand because it did only two things for GM.

1) Made money for about a decade. (this is a good thing)

2) Destroyed their Image on economy/environment more so than the Suburban ever could. (this is a bad thing)

IMO, the latter far outweighs the other- Perhaps without hummer, we would have seen alot better products in other areas, like better Hybrid platforms and Electric drivetrains. I dont think GM would be in the mess they are today if they hadn't handed whatever little bit of environmentally friendly image they had to Toyota on a silver platter.

All that being said, You are very wise to point that out.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guy makes some good points....

I would have sent the 95 Chevy Cavalier back and demanded better!

I would have at least demanded better by 1999, not 2004.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kept the B-bodies around, if nothing else but for fleet sales. There was no need to hand that entire segment of the market to Ford on a silver platter after '96. Ask a cop that's been around for a while if he/she has driven both. If they have, ninety-nine times out of a hundred they'll wish they had their Caprice back.

Even better than that, I'd have allowed the plan to redo the B-bodies in 97-98 and fit them with the LS1 to go through. This would have bought me time to gradually phase them out in favor of their replacements based off the VY platform from Holden, who would be aware of my desire to sell their platform in the US and design it to meet NA standards from the get go. I'd also use it as a basis for an F-body replacment, and maybe the Buick, Olds, and Pontiac W bodies.

My plan to keep the B-bods alive means that I don't cough up the plant to add Tahoe production. I'm not sure how I'd handle the demand - I'd probably either spread it out over the various truck plants, or reopen and retool a mothballed plant.

I'd have continually updated the 4.3 V6. There is absolutely no reason why this engine should have gotten not a single bump in horsepower since the early 90s. An updated 4.3 would have helped the Blazer compete with and possibly overtake the Explorer, while making the S10 the cream of the compact pickup class. It should have inherited all the tech that went into the LS engine. I'd have this engine as a base motor for the B-bodies and F-bodies also.

I'd have done everything I could to get the NVH and reliability issues with the Quad 4 fixed without sacrificing power. Then, I'd have scrapped all other 4cyls in GM's lineup and replaced it with a family based off the fixed Quad 4.

Same goes for the DOHC 3.4. Work out the quirks, and make it the V6 family of choice for the FWD midsize sedans.

I might have continued research/development of turbocharged engines.

I would have had a manual tranny avaiable on all N-body V6 models possibly excepting the Skylark.

I'd have found a taker for the 50% share that GM had in Saab

Seeing that it was a success but not really helping GM as a whole, I'd have sold off Saturn at the height of its popularity and probably gotten a nice penny for it.

I'd have raised the price of every GM car by $500 and given it a better interior

I'd have kept the Lumina name on the 1995 W-body Chevy coupe. RWD/FWD thing aside, it would have made the sales numbers for the Lumina look a little better.

I'd have allowed the designers to strut their stuff instead of bowing to engineers, safety Nazis, etc.

I might have productionized the Stingray III - as a Pontiac flagship.

I would not have abandoned the EV1 or the Sunracer.

I'd have fired everyone who didn't agree with me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make better quality vehicles.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given Paul a SC Riviera for free.

Seriously though, taken the Japanese cars seriously and focused VERY hard on bringing quality interiors up!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aimed to beat import competition and be price competitive in volume car segments, not match their previous generations and be cheaper

Invested in full replacement of Cavalier/Sunfire by 2000

Invested in full replacement of W and N Bodies by 2002

Made interior quality, ride and handling a priority in all their volume sellers

Don't think about Fiat or expansion of brands or models

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing that almost everyone hear has mentioned bringing quality up to meet and exceed the competition...how come it took GM (and Chrysler, and Ford) until literally now to figure this out?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amazing that almost everyone hear has mentioned bringing quality up to meet and exceed the competition...how come it took GM (and Chrysler, and Ford) until literally now to figure this out?

I think it always came down to the bean counters. They would probably always say it costs too much money, lets cheapen it by X amount.

Personally, I think they should have paid more attention to detail, and used higher quality parts, better interiors, better engines, and if they had to be sold at a loss to meet the market price, then so be it. Their reputation and sales would pick up after a while, and GM could have started raising the prices so they wouldn't have to rely on rebates to sell their vehicles.

Edited by CaddyXLR-V
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amazing that almost everyone hear has mentioned bringing quality up to meet and exceed the competition...how come it took GM (and Chrysler, and Ford) until literally now to figure this out?

How are we defining quality? IMO, *most* GM vehicles have been just as good if not better in quality in many areas than most or all of their competition for a while now. Take a look around at the other manufactures, and you'll see that GM isn't the only company with some turds here & there in the last 10 years.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, in 1995, I'd be about eight years old, so if I ran GM, I'd probably be outside the Ren Cen, sitting atop stacked phonebooks in the drivers seat of a Corvette making 'vroom vroom' sounds.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laugh if you will

Pontiac-niche, focussed cars...

Olds-spend lots of $ and make it a flagship.

Work on legacy costs.

As someone else said, keep RWD fullsize around.

Chris

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Given Paul a SC Riviera for free.

Seriously though, taken the Japanese cars seriously and focused VERY hard on bringing quality interiors up!

That SC Riviera from that era is just the cat's ass as far as a car goes. Again, a very under rated GM car. They got that one right for its market and era.

Chris

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last 5 out of the 6 CEOs of GM have pretty much come from the financial side of the company.

Fritz, Wags, John Smith, Roger Smith, Tom Murphy (that goes all the way back to 1974) All were financial

Bob Stemple was design at Olds.

PS - CNBC has named [Roger] Smith as being one of the "Worst American CEOs of All Time".

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting responses so far, keep them coming.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2004 Malibu would have been the same car as the 2008 version with Buick and Pontiac versions.

No more W bodies after the 2000 Impala.

No more G bodies after the 2000 DTS, LeSabre, Bonneville and 2001 Aurora.

One RWD platform instead of both Sigma and Zeta and would have been used for CTS in 2003 and W and G body replacements from 2003 through 2006.

J bodies would have been replaced by 2000. A steel bodied car based upon the Saturn S series would have been better than keeping the antiquated J bodies through 2004.

3.5L Shortstar V6 would have had VVT and 250 hp and replaced the 3800 in all premium applications by 2000.

I would not have spent money on the 4200 DOHC I6 and just used the 4.3L V6 and various V8's in the Trailblazer/Envoy. The 4.3L V6 would have received the same improvements the V8's received over the years.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That SC Riviera from that era is just the cat's ass as far as a car goes. Again, a very under rated GM car. They got that one right for its market and era.

Chris

I'll admit, back then I was just starting to look at cars being I was new to having a license. When I saw that Riviera, I dropped my jaw... it was edgy, elegant, smooth... it was luxurious... it was gorgeous. I thought that and then the Aurora were so ahead of their time.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would have offered the "aurora" V8 in more cars, would have also spread the Northstar across more models outside of Caddy. Would have kept the Cavalier Z24 around and made it a serious bang for the buck econobox. Beating the Civic SI to market here. I would have dropped the Sunbird/Sunfire and refocused Pontiac on actual performance cars, Firebird/Trans Am, make the then Bonneville SSEi have the Aurora V8 to give it a bit more power and bragging rights than it's platform mates with 3800 V6's. I would have made the Supercharged 3800 the standard Engine for the Riviera and either the Aurora V8 or the Northstar an optional engine. This was Buick's halo car, it should have a V8. There's really a whole bunch I would have done differently but this is just some things that come to mind.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would have at least demanded better by 1999, not 2004.

I've had a few J bodies (a few right now), anf they were dated by 1997. :neenerneener:

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