Sky, Solstice and Corvette: S.O.S.

[Camino LS6]

There is a difference, I put most of your opinion in the same catagory as the BM.  Irrational and not based on reality; just opinion and I have no use for that.

There is another difference, you might think me absurd, but I will be more right than wrong.  Touche - pick another angle with a real thought out argument and I might actually have some respect for you.  Until than I do not.  You do not challenge me with your insight.  Because there is none.  I only banter with you because you are an easy target.

Really now, must you always resort to insults? Lumping me in with Buickman is uncalled for and about as far off base as possible. Your delusions of granduer and infallibility make any geniune input on your part hardly worth the price.

I do think your position absurd and a product of too much time spent in the bloodless company of numbers and self assurance. You continuously present your predictions of the final impact of a product and program that is just now making an impact on the general public.

I have attempted again and again to be civil and respectful of you and to move the discussion into a positive place. You, on the other hand seem to thrive on discord and disrespect and drag things down to whatever bitter place your mind occupies.

Kappa is good news no matter how you try to spin it to the negative.

I have never seen someone try so hard to be a minus player at C&G. You really think much too highly of yourself. and, more importantly, too little of others.

Any news that's positive you will ignore or spin to the downside, and you make exactly zero attempt to understand the opinions,impressions or positions of anyone who refuses to accept your opinion as the word of God. If anyone is as oversure of himself as Buickman, you get the nod.

[Camino LS6]

The public's perception of these vehicles is the key.  Kappa is good for GM because people love the cars.  Product is going to save GM.  You have to spend money to make money.  Building these cars has generated goodwill.  Positivity like this helps.  Emotional connection helps.  Kappa itself will not "save" GM, but it is an example, external and internal to GM, that they can innovate with success and produce a desirable product.  There are lessons to be learned here, from the guy who considered an MX-5 but bought a Sky after seeing it, all the way up to Bob and Rick. 

Naysayers on this project astound me... as if GM, by some wild scenario, didn't know what they were doing when they greenlighted this special little car.  This was not a 3 billion dollar project, it was done on a relative shoestring, and it was money well spent for the amount of positive press and public reaction it has received.

Absolutely correct, and beyond the understanding of some.

[The O.C.]

Oh, I agree.  There is only a very limited demand for a 2-seat roadster with no trunk space.  Therefore, it really is necessary for GM to limit production.  That said, when production is artificially capped, I just don't see the cause for celebration.  Again, it isn't the Chevrolet Impala selling out at maximum capacity.  I just don't see the celebration: "Yay!  GM limited the production to less than demand and it SOLD OUT!"  No $h!, Sherlock...I'd frankly be very worried if it hadn't.

-----

Also, selling the vehicles above MSRP benefits the dealers, not GM.  GM still sells them at the invoice price and receives the invoice amount regardless of how much the dealership charges the customer.

VERY true.....!

We should all be celebrating when a GM vehicle like a Cobalt, or Impala, or Equinox demands the same level of consumer respect and enthusiasm as Solstice, SKY, and Corvette do....

GM needs MAINSTREAM hits....not niche-vehicle winners...

[The O.C.]

The public's perception of these vehicles is the key.  Kappa is good for GM because people love the cars.  Product is going to save GM.  You have to spend money to make money.  Building these cars has generated goodwill.  Positivity like this helps.  Emotional connection helps.  Kappa itself will not "save" GM, but it is an example, external and internal to GM, that they can innovate with success and produce a desirable product.  There are lessons to be learned here, from the guy who considered an MX-5 but bought a Sky after seeing it, all the way up to Bob and Rick. 

Naysayers on this project astound me... as if GM, by some wild scenario, didn't know what they were doing when they greenlighted this special little car.  This was not a 3 billion dollar project, it was done on a relative shoestring, and it was money well spent for the amount of positive press and public reaction it has received.

ocnblu....Evok's, and Croc's, and my point is that the money would have been far better spent on a new, let's say for argument's sake, compact-to-midsize, RWD, sedan platform that would.....

1) Provide a similar level of excitement for a GM product that we are seeing with Solstice and SKY....(re...aggressively-styled, great-driving, "poor man's" BMW 3-series) and....

2) Give GM a platform that is widely more flexible for future product programs.

I'm not saying the small, RWD sedan platform is THE answer....just an example of another "exciting" product program that could spawn far greater future product benefits (and revenue) for the company.

[The O.C.]

Your delusions of granduer and infallibility make any geniune input on your part hardly worth the price.

I certainly hope you are speaking for YOURSELF........

Evok's insights are supported by an intense connection to the U.S. automotive industry that goes WELL beyond "just" working for a Big 3 manufacturer. Many have tried to point that out on here many times....and most of us know it. He brings, I would argue, THE strongestly-supported opinion, insights, and knowledge of what's going on in this industry to this C&G website.

You may find his approach too combatitive.....but maybe that's because it seems your ego won't allow you to sit down and for once maybe take a strong, non-biased look at his insights.

It doesn't mean you have to change your opinions or even agree with him....but the manner in which you dismiss him doesn't reflect well on yourself....and I'm sure ONLY adds to his frustration in having any sort of constructive debate with you on here.

[Camino LS6]

I certainly hope you are speaking for YOURSELF........

Evok's insights are supported by an intense connection to the U.S. automotive industry that goes WELL beyond "just" working for a Big 3 manufacturer.  Many have tried to point that out on here many times....and most of us know it.  He brings, I would argue, THE strongestly-supported opinion, insights, and knowledge of what's going on in this industry to this C&G website.

You may find his approach too combatitive.....but maybe that's because it seems your ego won't allow you to sit down and for once maybe take a strong, non-biased look at his insights.

It doesn't mean you have to change your opinions or even agree with him....but the manner in which you dismiss him doesn't reflect well on yourself....and I'm sure ONLY adds to his frustration in having any sort of constructive debate with you on here.

I dismiss him in a slightly more civil manner than he dismisses me.

I am unconvinced of the value of his input. I believe that his pronouncements (always presented as incontovertible fact) are often premature at best.

This has nothing to do with ego, I want what is good for C&G and GM. This requires that a free exchange of ideas be possible in an environment of respect. Something that his posts are devoid of.

I posit that had the course of action your cadre seem to back been followed we wouldn't have any new product in the small RWD segment at all. Further, when the "volume" model finally debuted without the support of the roadsters, no one would even notice and the mediocrity at GM would continue.

Building a better Camry just won't cut it, GM needs models that set it apart from the crowd.

Do we need the volume product you are calling for? Of course we do, but we need the goodwill of the public more.

I enjoy constructive debate and the presentation of opposing ideas, Evok seems to enjoy only unqualified adulation.

[4gm]

Obviously the Soltice is doing very well for Pontiac. And it looks like the Sky will do just as well for Saturn. GM just should have fully fleshed out the Kappa architecture to insure more derivatives before it went full steam ahead with the Soltice and Sky. I'm not saying these cars shouldn't have been made. But they should have been put on the back burner while Kappa was being fully developed. And I think that's what others are saying as well.

Early on the Soltice was touted as a demonstrational exercise for how fast GM could bring a brand new car to market. As well all know, a brand new architecture was created for it. My question is, why did it take longer to bring other all Lutz cars which used existing architectures onto the market? The HHR, Lucerne, H3, Aura? It seems like a better use of GM's limited resources would be to rush a program to replace one of GM's mainstream vehicles that has a usable architecture already in place.

Edited April 23, 2006 by 4gm

[The O.C.]

I dismiss him in a slightly more civil manner than he dismisses me.

I am unconvinced of the value of his input. I believe that his pronouncements (always presented as incontovertible fact) are often premature at best.

Thanks for the reply....

Regarding his pronouncements.....he presents them that way because, as hard as it may be to accept, they ARE solidly rooted in fact....

He KNOWS what he's talking about.....he's lived it and seen it from many sides. And because of the experience that I have in the industry, perhaps I can see it easier than others....

No one is saying he's providing gospel on here, but I know Evok perhaps better than anyone else on here.....we've had similar experiences in the industry....(and his are even more strongly-tied than mine) so all I'm trying to say is that when he debates something that conflicts with your opinion, or perhaps popular opinion on here, he does it for a solid, and good, reason.

Remember.....we are not all only enthusiastic on here about GMs products, I'd say we ALL want GM to be successful.

WELL, unfortunately, for GM to be successful, even avoid BK, and thrive ten, twenty, thirty years from now, there are things that need to be done that sometimes can seem to conflict severly to what us GM fans on here would like to see.....(e.g....a more highly-flexible new platform than what Kappa gave us.)

AND, I can't stress this enough, a "better Camry" is EXACTLY what GM needs right now....or they will never recapture the spirit of the U.S. automotive consumer shopper.

The Solstices and Camaros and GTOs will follow in due time.

If you CAN'T build a "better Camry" then you could be doomed for failure.

[Flybrian]

I think people here are adequately adept at defending themselves without the help of others.

[Camino LS6]

Thanks for the reply....

Regarding his pronouncements.....he presents them that way because, as hard as it may be to accept, they ARE solidly rooted in fact....

He KNOWS what he's talking about.....he's lived it and seen it from many sides.  And because of the experience that I have in the industry, perhaps I can see it easier than others....

No one is saying he's providing gospel on here, but I know Evok perhaps better than anyone else on here.....we've had similar experiences in the industry....(and his are even more strongly-tied than mine) so all I'm trying to say is that when he debates something that conflicts with your opinion, or perhaps popular opinion on here, he does it for a solid, and good, reason.

Remember.....we are not all only enthusiastic on here about GMs products, I'd say we ALL want GM to be successful.

WELL, unfortunately, for GM to be successful, even avoid BK, and thrive ten, twenty, thirty years from now, there are things that need to be done that sometimes can seem to conflict severly to what us GM fans on here would like to see.....(e.g....a more highly-flexible new platform than what Kappa gave us.)

AND, I can't stress this enough, a "better Camry" is EXACTLY what GM needs right now....or they will never recapture the spirit of the U.S. automotive consumer shopper.

The Solstices and Camaros and GTOs will follow in due time.

If you CAN'T build a "better Camry" then you could be doomed for failure.

Of course GM needs the "better Camry", and a more flexible small RWD platform (which they are working on) but they went the extra mile and brought us Kappa much earlier than would have been possible via the development of the more flexible platform. They brought it to us using parts bin items and built it in an otherwise idle plant with a budget that wouldn't scratch the surface of the larger program. In doing so, they pave the way to this new platform with the public good will established by these pioneer roadsters. If they make a few bucks on Kappa when the production run ends, great. IF it costs them a few bucks after all is said and done, then it is money well spent establishing a more favorable reception for the new architecture when it arrives. This sort of product is what is needed in all segments, on that I think we can agree.

[The O.C.]

I think people here are adequately adept at defending themselves without the help of others.

Fly....in ALL due respect....please stay out of this one....

You don't know what you are talking about in THIS particular case...

[Mr.Krinkle]

IF it costs them a few bucks after all is said and done, then it is money well spent establishing a more favorable reception for the new architecture when it arrives. This sort of product is what is needed in all segments, on that I think we can agree.

absof@#kinlutely.

the entire public relations card has to be met and challenged somehow.

create a buzz with a sensational world beating camry buster then show all the neat cool little cars you can produce.

or

throw the carbuying public into a chatter with gorgeous eyepopping designs?

affordable and sporty mo less. get a buzz going then show em what else you got.

my moneys on the latter.

face it, no ones been paying attention to gm for what they have, just for what they dont have.

now they have something ...but its flawed... in some contrived way.

baby step back to greatness. or maybe some could just snap their fingers and have it done by now...or just bitch until theyrre blue in the face.

its progress, however small or perhaps calculated its getting recognition.

baby steps--then hit em upside the f*@%in head. wont see it coming and godwilling wont even know what hit them either.

Edited April 23, 2006 by Mr.Krinkle

[evok]

In six months I will ressurect my "absurd" point of view on the kappa cars sales and if it really is money well spend. Until Sept. 06.

[Guest Josh]

Naturally sales will fall off and decline towards the end of summer beginning of fall.

[Camino LS6]

Hmm, since the 06 cars are already sold out the only change we can look at in September will be the early returns on the 07s. Still, I welcome the idea.

[Croc]

I don't think that's quite what evok is talking about.

[evok]

Hmm, since the 06 cars are already sold out the only change we can look at in September will be the early returns on the 07s. Still, I welcome the idea.

The Kappa cars are not sold out and I do know the Lutz quotes you are refering to. GM has orders booked but orders do not necessarily equate to sales to the end consumer. Production sales are different than retail sales. They are often confused.

[Camino LS6]

The Kappa cars are not sold out and I do know the Lutz quotes you are refering to.  GM has orders booked but orders do not necessarily equate to sales to the end consumer.  Production sales are different than retail sales.  They are often confused.

I understand that.

Croc seems to think I misinterpreted what you meant by your comment about looking at this in Sept., Did I?

My impression is that you meant retail deliveries of 06/07 models,correct?

[Camino LS6]

I should also point out that my assertion that Kappa is a positive thing is not predicated solely upon the profitability of the current roadster pair.

[evok]

I understand that.

Croc seems to think I misinterpreted what you meant by your comment about looking at this in Sept., Did I?

My impression is that you meant retail deliveries of 06/07 models,correct?

Retail is the only real measure.

[ocnblu]

Hmmm... hey, I've been thinking. Since the Kappa platform is such a waste of money, I'd like to hear the naysayers' view on the other car mentioned at the top of this thread, Corvette. WHY haven't we heard about that blatant waste of money? I mean, that platform only supports two cars, Corvette and XLR. It's totally inflexible, and very narrowly focused. GM is STUPID for producing such a dedicated platform. I say GM should immediately stop Corvette and XLR production and set its sights on the finest car on the market today... the Toyota Camry.

You guys are soo logical, and I'm sooo glad you're not running the world's number 1 automaker.

[evok]

I should also point out that my assertion that Kappa is a positive thing is not predicated solely upon the profitability of the current roadster pair.

I have a good idea what the car costs to make but it is way to early to talk profitability and I am done talking about the subjective halo effect merits. There are two unique discussions there, one for each kappa vehicle.

[Camino LS6]

Retail is the only real measure.

Accepted.

[Camino LS6]

I have a good idea what the car costs to make but it is way to early to talk profitability and I am done talking about the subjective halo effect merits.  There are two unique discussions there, one for each kappa vehicle.

Agreed.

[Croc]

Hmmm... hey, I've been thinking.  Since the Kappa platform is such a waste of money, I'd like to hear the naysayers' view on the other car mentioned at the top of this thread, Corvette.  WHY haven't we heard about that blatant waste of money?  I mean, that platform only supports two cars, Corvette and XLR.  It's totally inflexible, and very narrowly focused.  GM is STUPID for producing such a dedicated platform.  I say GM should immediately stop Corvette and XLR production and set its sights on the finest car on the market today... the Toyota Camry.

You guys are soo logical, and I'm sooo glad you're not running the world's number 1 automaker.

More logical than you. Look at the two cars on that platform (which, by the way, was an extensive reworking of the 1997 Corvette platform and NOT a start-from-scratch, from-the-ground-up new platform): one costs $44,490 base MSRP, the other at $77,295. The profitability equations for these two products are much different than the SKY and Solstice, two highly differentiated cars priced only a few grand within each other. It is a known fact that profit margins increase as MSRP increases. The XLR costs over $30k more than the Corvette, minimum.

Also, you grossly misinterpret my main argument. Could it be that you didn't read my posts very well? No one is saying that GM shouldn't make the Solstice and SKY...merely that they should NOT have been produced on a platform that was rushed to market and therefore very inflexible. The Solstice and SKY could have easily arrived 12 to 18 months later with no impact on sales. No impact on hype. They could have been better engineered in that time too...this more fully-evolved Kappa might have better trunk space. The interiors could even have been better (especially in the Solstice's case). More variants could be produced on the architecture, leading to profitability. Sure, they would launch a year after the Miata, but at least then they might actually be a BETTER package than Miata, instead of just competing well.

GM rushed Kappa. The argument is against Kappa, not Solstice or SKY. Until you can separate the cars from the poorly-executed platform, you will be failing to comprehend the logical arguments being made. GM rushed Kappa to market, and it shows. The Solstice and SKY, however, are generally excellent little roadsters.

GM did not rush the Corvette and XLR to market. That platform is already a segment best, frequently beating out much more expensive rivals (in the case of the Corvette) in comparison tests. For the XLR, it always comes in as a close runner-up, mainly because it just hasn't had as luxurious an interior as the competition.

Edited April 23, 2006 by Croc

[evok]

Hmmm... hey, I've been thinking.  Since the Kappa platform is such a waste of money, I'd like to hear the naysayers' view on the other car mentioned at the top of this thread, Corvette.  WHY haven't we heard about that blatant waste of money?  I mean, that platform only supports two cars, Corvette and XLR.  It's totally inflexible, and very narrowly focused.  GM is STUPID for producing such a dedicated platform.  I say GM should immediately stop Corvette and XLR production and set its sights on the finest car on the market today... the Toyota Camry.

You guys are soo logical, and I'm sooo glad you're not running the world's number 1 automaker.

Actually the Corvette is the most profitable car GM sells as a % margin. XLR, well that is another discussion.

But you bring up an interesting point. If GM could put the same energy into a Camry competitor, that appeals to the public at large, sells close to sticker without heavy incentives IMO the naysayers would have no issues with kappa.

But in many ways, I do believe the Corvette in the great scheme of things at GM is a product that should be put on hold until everything else is straightened out. The Corvette will not save GM.

Also, remember the Vette was to die in 1997. So it would not be the first time this topic came up.

Edited April 23, 2006 by evok

[Camino LS6]

Hmmm... hey, I've been thinking.  Since the Kappa platform is such a waste of money, I'd like to hear the naysayers' view on the other car mentioned at the top of this thread, Corvette.  WHY haven't we heard about that blatant waste of money?  I mean, that platform only supports two cars, Corvette and XLR.  It's totally inflexible, and very narrowly focused.  GM is STUPID for producing such a dedicated platform.  I say GM should immediately stop Corvette and XLR production and set its sights on the finest car on the market today... the Toyota Camry.

You guys are soo logical, and I'm sooo glad you're not running the world's number 1 automaker.

Good points. Hell, the Vette and XLR aren't even opening a new market for GM like Kappa, must be a waste.

[Croc]

Good points. Hell, the Vette and XLR aren't even opening a new market for GM like Kappa, must be a waste.

Actually, there weren't really any. The entire argument was flawed. See evok's post above RE: Corvette. Also, I do believe the XLR opened a new market for GM. In fact, the XLR was a very important pillar in the resurrection of Cadillac. The successful Art & Science design language started with the 1999 Evoq show car, the concept version of the XLR. Edited April 23, 2006 by Croc

[Camino LS6]

Actually, there weren't really any.  The entire argument was flawed.  See evok's post above RE: Corvette.  Also, I do believe the XLR opened a new market for GM.  In fact, the XLR was a very important pillar in the resurrection of Cadillac.  The successful Art & Science design language started with the 1999 Evoq show car, the concept version of the XLR.

Note the smiley,Croc.

Just interjecting a laugh.

[Camino LS6]

This thread has fractured into at least 6 separate debates, maybe we should re-post some more concise topics to deal with them.

Edit: Thoughts?

Edited April 23, 2006 by Camino LS6

[Croc]

Note the smiley,Croc.

Just interjecting a laugh.

My apology.

[CaddyXLR-V]

Was the first gen Prius a waste? We know Toyota lost money on them.

But then again, Toyota has money to waste.

[sciguy_0504]

The Prius and SKY/Solstice launches/original designs cannot be compared.

[Croc]

The Prius and SKY/Solstice launches/original designs cannot be compared.

Exactly. Companies can/should do more image vehicles when the finances are all in order. A company making a frivolous, limited low-volume vehicle platform "because they can" while they are reporting $10B losses is just stupid. Toyota, however, is swimming in cash and can afford to waste money.

[CaddyXLR-V]

I'm kind of in between on this. The reason I like GM is because of cars like the Corvette, GTO, Sky/Solstice, the next Camaro etc, cars that some think GM shouldn't waste time on.

But then again I want GM to succeed and make money, so I want them to make amazing FWD midsize sedans, even though it is not something I would ever buy.

But I guess that means the right way for GM, would be to start making money by building a "better camry", and making a profit again, then worrying about the niche cars later. I think kappa would have been better off if GM would have made it able to support a full line of cars, instead of just 2 seat roadsters, but I'm sure Lutz had to go through hell just to get that approved. If kappa II gets approved as a result of it though, I wouldn't say it was a failure.

[Camino LS6]

I'm kind of in between on this. The reason I like GM is because of cars like the Corvette, GTO, Sky/Solstice, the next Camaro etc, cars that some think GM shouldn't waste time on.

But then again I want GM to succeed and make money, so I want them to make amazing FWD midsize sedans, even though it is not something I would ever buy.

But I guess that means the right way for GM, would be to start making money by building a "better camry", and making a profit again, then worrying about the niche cars later. I think kappa would have been better off if GM would have made it able to support a full line of cars, instead of just 2 seat roadsters, but I'm sure Lutz had to go through hell just to get that approved. If kappa II gets approved as a result of it though, I wouldn't say it was a failure.

Precisely.

[Croc]

I'd still call Kappa II a "failure" though simply because engineering 2 platforms when GM should have been able to do the job with one...thats spending twice as much as they should have. Remember, Kappa is so damned inflexible that to get it to support other types of vehicles would require so many modifications that it wouldn't really be the same platform.

[turbo200]

Exactly.  Companies can/should do more image vehicles when the finances are all in order.  A company making a frivolous, limited low-volume vehicle platform "because they can" while they are reporting $10B losses is just stupid.  Toyota, however, is swimming in cash and can afford to waste money.

To add to this; Corvette has been around for fifty years, and already a solid platform in the late '90's that was pretty much just extensively reeningeered for the hardtop XLR, and reworked for additional stiffness and such. This platform was already in existance. Constrast this with Kappa, which comes at a time when GM is more desperate than ever for good product, AND is losing money hand over fist, and you can begin to see why this is such a precarious time for GM, and why evok would say Kappa is a waste of engineering dollars. Bottom line, something more flexible, while still timely and able to produce stunning roadsters, is what was needed more than what we got. As it is though, Kappa is working to create good will for the company. BUT that is a different debate from whether it makes good business sense.

[CaddyXLR-V]

I'd still call Kappa II a "failure" though simply because engineering 2 platforms when GM should have been able to do the job with one...thats spending twice as much as they should have.  Remember, Kappa is so damned inflexible that to get it to support other types of vehicles would require so many modifications that it wouldn't really be the same platform.

Yes, but GM needs to get rid of those bean counters who actually end up costing GM more in the end. GM is not there yet, but hopefully that is where they are going.

[Croc]

Actually, believe it or not, the bean counters weren't the ones who rushed Kappa through with all its limitations. You need the bean counters at GM. They're an easy scapegoat, but they need to be there since their job is to prevent the wasting of money. GM needs a balance between bean counters and car guys. That's where Rick Wagoner comes in. If the car guys who were pushing Kappa were more circumspect, we'd have a more flexible platform that would be better in almost every way as well as being able of spawning different RWD variants.

[ocnblu]

Producing a platform with too many targets dilutes its effectiveness. It wouldn't work for an Impala to be built on the Y-body.

[Northstar]

I'd still call Kappa II a "failure" though simply because engineering 2 platforms when GM should have been able to do the job with one...thats spending twice as much as they should have.  Remember, Kappa is so damned inflexible that to get it to support other types of vehicles would require so many modifications that it wouldn't really be the same platform.

I don't know... by then Kappa would probably need updating to keep it competitive in the marketplace.

Producing a platform with too many targets dilutes its effectiveness. It wouldn't work for an Impala to be built on the Y-body.

While I agree with your example, Kappa II should be able to spawn the NG Solstice and Sky, a 3-Series for Pontiac, a 3-door hatch for Chevy (Nomad) or Pontiac, and even a small trucklet if GM wanted it to. It doesn't have to be able to underpin a large sedan, but it should be able to be modified enough easily to underpin anything and everything under ~185 inches that GM wants it to.

[Croc]

Producing a platform with too many targets dilutes its effectiveness.  It wouldn't work for an Impala to be built on the Y-body.

Not if they are all similar targets. Look at the Infiniti FX, G35 coupe and sedan, Nissan 350Z...all of those are very successful vehicles, and all are on the same platform, with just a few modifications here and there. They are pretty different targets, no? So...what's Nissan/Infiniti's secret of producing one platform that is flexible enough for multiple variants?

If GM had been more practical, they could have produced a small RWD platform that could spawn small roadsters, compact coupes, maybe even a sedan or hatch/sportwagon. One platform can underpin a wide variety of vehicles successfully as long as each application is calibrated and tuned for the needs of each segment. If Nissan/Infiniti can do it, then GM could have as well.

[Croc]

I don't know... by then Kappa would probably need updating to keep it competitive in the marketplace.

But updating Kappa won't let it spawn other variants. The modifications necessary to let it spawn other vehicles would virtually make it a whole new platform.

[Guest Josh]

Why are we debating whether or not Kappa is good or bad because of GM's financial situation right now.

The program was started back in 2003 when the grasses were much greener. Why are we beating each other up over the Kappa that is out right now instead of the one that is going to be out towards the end of the decade?

To the naysayers of Kappa. Would it be better if GM would have scrapped the product when they started to bleed heavy amounts of money and chalk the 200million + up to "bad planning" or does it look better if they can make headway on their investment?

What I'm trying to say is, everything happens for a reason and there is a far and away better Kappa coming along the way. They simply couldnt afford to delay it another 12 or 18 months Croc. If they did, it would have cost them more $$$$ overall and would have never made a profit. Furthermore........the $$$$$ as not there for them to delay it for more engineering dollars.

There's so much more that goes into making a car than me you or anybody else saying "yea....buuuuuut"

Yea but nothing. If you want to design and manufacture cars get your degree to do so.

[evok]

Yea but nothing. If you want to design and manufacture cars get your degree to do so.

A couple of mine say just that.

[Guest Josh]

A couple of mine say just that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just curious if you do it? I mean its one thing to get a degree in something. A piece of paper just tells you that you can do something.

It's another thing to do it and practice it in real life and excel in it. Do you excel in automotive design?

[CaddyXLR-V]

Just curious if you do it? I mean its one thing to get a degree in something. A piece of paper just tells you that you can do something.

It's another thing to do it and practice it in real life and excel in it. Do you excel in automotive design?

I think its been proven that he knows his stuff. We may not always agree with him, but is that enough of a reason for your question?

[evok]

Just curious if you do it? I mean its one thing to get a degree in something. A piece of paper just tells you that you can do something.

It's another thing to do it and practice it in real life and excel in it. Do you excel in automotive design?

Well your favorite auto company formally trained me! Yea, I have done a lotta things over the years. There might still be a little part of my handy work in your Solstice after all these years as carryover.

And you?

Edited April 24, 2006 by evok

[Trimnell1]

So that's why you have a GMS discount right, evok? Count me in as one of the guys who really values your insider opinions and insights on this site and others that you post at. BTW, I (under a different name) enjoyed bantering with you on AH-HA's old site.