wildcat

"Killing the Dream"

35 posts in this topic

Jerry Flint does not 'write'. He wipes his ass with a sheet of paper then hands it to his editor. No; I didn't read it. Don't have to.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think Saturn is going to be GM's best brand, because they won't have any weak products. The Sky, Aura both kick ass, and the Outlook is said to be really good (and the engines sound GREAT!), and the next ION is said to be drop-dead-goreous. That's basically Saturn's whole line except the next VUE which should be nice considering it will be the Opel version of the S3X (which will therefore be nicer than the S3X). The only question mark is the next Relay, and Lutz said "judge me after the next minivan."
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that ditching the plastic pannels is a mistake because allot of the old saturns are still around simply because they have no rust and are easyer to maintain because of this. I know a fiew people that have saturns and have had saturn's in the past and not one spot of rust. This is one quality they cannot eliminate from saturn! I find it essential to the brand!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GM should have never started Saturn to begin with. All the resources used on Saturn in the early 1990's starved the other divisions of needed product. But the dealers are good and deserve a chance with more attractive product. Saturn will be OK, as long as the Aura and Outlook are not overpriced. Price the Aura competitively with the Ford Fusion and price the Outlook competitively with the Freestyle, and Saturn will be OK. But price them against Acuras, and I think there will be problems.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The "new" Saturn is a mixed bag. On one hand, I'm glad that their new products look good and that they are getting new products. On the other, I'm disappointed that they've gotten rid of the old Saturn character, which I miss on the Aura. Lutz says that Saturn's only strength was their customer care, and I disagree. Their old styling was fresh, original, experimental (almost US Renault), and full of character... the internals of the cars being the let down. GM had an opportunity to make Saturn something cool and unique but failed miserably, so now they're resorting to generic Euro-look cars that appeal to the Bobs and Sallys.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
empowah, couldn't have said it better myself.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saturn now is a miserable failure...... Look at what MADE Saturn special..... * Vehicle designs NOT shared with another GM division..... * A special UAW contract.....and VERY happy workers..... * A new assembly plant in the south when only import manufacturers looking to build there...since then, no other domestic manufacturer has followed them * A unique group of dealerships that all worked to offer the same "feel-good" experience....an experience not shared at other GM dealerships. * AN ALMOST TOTAL LACK OF RECOGNITION BY THE BUYING PUBLIC THAT SATURN WAS IN ANY WAY RELATED TO GENERAL MOTORS * Headquarters, field offices, white-collar employees separate from the rest of GM and with their own individual culture. * SKIP! Maybe the products weren't perfect (I had a '91 SL1 when it was new) but they were the most import-like domestics products on sale at the time in look, feel, and interior quality. That started to slip away, however, as GM asserted more and more control.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the new Saturn is much improved. So what if the new products aren't quite as unique, at least they'll be pretty close, if not class-leading products. GM is in the business to make money, and so far Saturn has only lost GM billions. If Saturn wouldn't have changed, it would have been axed in a few years, I feel. Saturn's still going to have the same dealership experience, but they'll finally have desireable products.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the new Saturn is much improved. So what if the new products aren't quite as unique, at least they'll be pretty close, if not class-leading products.

GM is in the business to make money, and so far Saturn has only lost GM billions. If Saturn wouldn't have changed, it would have been axed in a few years, I feel. Saturn's still going to have the same dealership experience, but they'll finally have desireable products.

[post="11933"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]



All I'm saying......is take a look at the (consumer-side) success of Saturn in the past.....the sales numbers.....the public perception.....

And compare it to NOW.....

It's a scary time for Saturn......

I think if they would have focused more on the problems they had at the time, they could have reversed Saturn's money-losing situation without forcing Saturn to give up its unique existance within GM.....Saturn used to be a Corporation for goodness sakes....
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saturn's independence made it great. It didn't really threaten the rest of the GM lineup, it fostered great recognition for itself, and like O.C. said, no one knew it was part of GM. Some still don't today. Saturn had the chance to truly exist mostly by itself, falling back on its parent for experience, engineering, customer financing, marketing budgets, and warranty assistance. I really don't see how Saturn is going to fare from here on out. They sold just as well with three bodystyles of one vehicle as they did with six bodystyles of four vehicles. Its no longer the friendly, happy lil' car next door; now its apparently going to be some svelte, sophisticated car, some half-assed Oldsmobile if you will. You have to understand the place Olds once held in the American marketplace as a truly desired and intelligent automobile. Only Olds had identity, history, and a following in that genre; Saturn doesn't. Plastic panels, free car washes, the Saturn Fest in Spring Hill, and all the other aspects of traditional Saturn culture is fading. You and I may make fun of it and write it off as some dorky goofball shit, but so many people bought into it and loved it. And most importantly, they bought the cars, too... Will they now?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd like to see Aura and other upcoming models to have the Sky concept's side swoosh and have more daring styling-the Aura looks nice, but still from the popular 'pleasantly bland' school of design as far as I can tell. Why not make a fastback version to distinguish when the Buick LaCrosse is redesigned?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Face it, Saturn hasn't had a vehicle worth buying for years. Hopefully this will atleast putsh people forward to want to buy them beyond customer service.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its no longer the friendly, happy lil' car next door; now its apparently going to be some svelte, sophisticated car, some half-assed Oldsmobile if you will.

[post="12069"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]


That wouldn't happen if Chevy had decent cars to begin with. Chevy should have the "svelte, sophisticated" cars, so that Saturn can keep to its funky nature.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Saturn is going to be GM's best brand, because they won't have any weak products. The Sky, Aura both kick ass, and the Outlook is said to be really good (and the engines sound GREAT!), and the next ION is said to be drop-dead-goreous. That's basically Saturn's whole line except the next VUE which should be nice considering it will be the Opel version of the S3X (which will therefore be nicer than the S3X).

The only question mark is the next Relay, and Lutz said "judge me after the next minivan."

[post="10851"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]



Lets hope your right about the ION. The curent one is digusting! (The Redline coupe is not bad) The Aura and sky look great though.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
my wife bought a saturn sl2 new in 99, her first new car. since then the family has grown, our needs have changed, but there really isnt anything at saturn we like. the relay is our size, but doesnt belong there, the ion makes me wish for the sl2. the vue was closest, being a unique vehicle, but it was ruined first with a honda engine and this year a horrible front end makeover. now with all metal cars that are just "different" versions of other divisions, they might as well call the place oldsmobile and be done with it. i like the looks of what is coming, i have high hopes, but it just isnt the saturn we first became enamoured of. -_-
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it's really a shame that the plastic body panels are going away. My 1997 SL2 has 220,000 miles on it and the doors and fenders look as good as new. Contrast that with my parents' 2005 Honda Accord, which already has a couple of dings in the body. If Saturn isn't going to do it, I wish some automaker would come up with something better than easily dented thin sheetmetal. Spending 20 or 30 grand on a new car and having to put up with unsightly body damage from normal parking lot abuse just plain sucks!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jerry Flint does not 'write'. He wipes his ass with a sheet of paper then hands it to his editor.

No; I didn't read it. Don't have to.

[post="10837"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]


I agree exactly.

I'm sure he's bitching about something of worthless concern.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[COLOR=blue]* Vehicle designs NOT shared with another GM division.....

* A special UAW contract.....and VERY happy workers.....

* A new assembly plant in the south when only import manufacturers looking to build there...since then, no other domestic manufacturer has followed them

* Headquarters, field offices, white-collar employees separate from the rest of GM and with their own individual culture.

All of which cost GM far more than the mediocre cars actually made. GM lost at least $3 billion on a "different kind of car company"

"Special", "different", "seperate" are fine for Porsche with Porsche prices. But for a entry level car, one dedicated staff, one plant, one specialized are not sustainable.

Actual Saturn quality was far worse than what customers reported since the Saturn dealers take great care of the customers. ( By the way, Saturn dealers are much more closely bound to GM common policies than other dealers, since the Saturn franchise are more legally bound to the centralized GM that so many compalin about. - the crappy dealers exist becasue they legally can refuse to behve like GM prescribes)

The plastic panel flatness and gaps that acceptably large in the Fiero in the 80's and SL1 and SL2 in the early 90's look impossibly huge, especially after a few years of sun and freezing. The Ion now is a new car that has a amateur quality to it, since the panels look like something the neighbor has "restored" with two gallons of Bondo.

GM's current plan is sustainable, and captializes on the all the fine product that Opel makes, but since the late 70's has not come to the US. For relatively little additonal costs, GM has a distinctive looking, high visual quality, high relaiblity car line for the US that finally uses the same engineering and manufacturing methods as their highest quality cars to go along with industry leading Saturn customer service.

With the new strategy, one day Saturn will be able to pay back the $3B with interest and could be considered a good investment for GM,

All of this is over Jerry Flint's head, who is now so lazy, he just mails in "me too" slam of the week. Time to retire. Actual journalism requires homework and critical thought.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[COLOR=blue]* Vehicle designs NOT shared with another GM division.....

* A special UAW contract.....and VERY happy workers.....

* A new assembly plant in the south when only import manufacturers looking to build there...since then, no other domestic manufacturer has followed them

* Headquarters, field offices, white-collar employees separate from the rest of GM and with their own individual culture.

All of which cost GM far more than the mediocre cars actually made.  GM lost at least $3 billion on a "different kind of car company"

"Special", "different", "seperate" are fine for Porsche with Porsche prices.  But for a entry level car, one dedicated staff, one plant, one specialized are not sustainable. 

Actual Saturn quality was far worse than what customers reported since the Saturn dealers take great care of the customers.  ( By the way, Saturn dealers are much more closely bound to GM common policies than other dealers, since the Saturn franchise are more legally bound to the centralized GM that so many compalin about. - the crappy dealers exist becasue they legally can refuse to behve like GM prescribes)

The plastic panel flatness and gaps that acceptably large in the Fiero in the 80's and SL1 and SL2 in the early 90's look impossibly huge, especially after a few years of sun and freezing.  The Ion now is a new car that has a amateur quality to it, since the panels look like something the neighbor has "restored" with two gallons of Bondo.

GM's current plan is sustainable, and captializes on the all the fine product that Opel makes, but since the late 70's has not come to the US.  For relatively little additonal costs, GM has a distinctive looking, high visual quality, high relaiblity car line for the US that finally uses the same engineering and manufacturing methods as their highest quality cars to go along with industry leading Saturn customer service.

With the new strategy, one day Saturn will be able to pay back the $3B with interest and could be considered a good investment for GM,

All of this is over Jerry Flint's head, who is now so lazy, he just mails in "me too" slam of the week.  Time to retire.  Actual journalism requires homework and critical thought.

[post="25526"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I agree. GM's new strategy for Saturn will put them on many many more buyers lists. Even mine. If Saturn's sales triple, which I think is possible seeing the new cars they are getting, who in their right mind could call that a failure? Just like when people complain about changing the Saab recipe, they sell 40,000 cars a year, how good can that recipe be? Change is needed to survive.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The plastic panel flatness and gaps that acceptably large in the Fiero in the 80's and SL1 and SL2 in the early 90's look impossibly huge, especially after a few years of sun and freezing.  The Ion now is a new car that has a amateur quality to it, since the panels look like something the neighbor has "restored" with two gallons of Bondo.


The ION looks horrible...much worse than the S Series did, so I don't think it's just a matter of the plastic panels.

Personally, I think slightly larger panel gaps look a lot better than the inevitable dings in a metal body from parking lot abuse, and other hazards in the real world. I care more about how my car is going to hold up over the long term than how it looks sitting in the showroom!

Take note the next time you see an early 90's Saturn coupe out on the road. It's still probably one of the best looking cars out there! Edited by vt_hokie
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saturn was right on target when they started out...but if GM didn't take control they would have died a few years back. The plastic panels can't be as tight as steel. GM made Saturn go steel now, to produce tighter gaps and less noise and higher quality. Make no mistake...saturns last as long as anything....but unfortunately people don't care about longevity these days...which is why the American car companies are suffering. I would would love to see how long the asian brands last compared to American brands and the price you pay for asian parts to keep your baby running. When the asians take over....don't blame me that your "headlight cost's $500...ok?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Aura and the new Ion (whatever they are going to call it) are years too late. The Aura should have been ready when the G6 was. Seems like we're always playing catchup instead of setting the benchmark for cars, competing with models that came out 3 years earlier.. Its depressing.
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

Loading...