lostletters

Actually I would say eliminate Buick, which is to qoute somebody, "the car you die in". Buicks gap as a lower priced luxury car can be filled by expanding the Caddy line. If there is any line that has an age problem in GM, its buick. The fact is Pontiac has one advantage, it is the ONLY line that appeals to younger drivers. Eliminating it would be a failed policy. But setting it apart is necessary, but RWD exclusivity is NOT the way to do it. It would kill Pontiac's largest sales market: Chicago. With that being said, going all RWD is a big mistake. Offering AWD on all models and focusing on performance oriented cars is probably a better way to go. As much as RWD is touted by warm weather folks, it is impracticle in colder climates. While having RWD is a good idea on SOME models, it would a bad idea to make it standard across the brand. I think once the g8 comes out to replace the grand prix, it should be the LAST RWD vehicle with pontiac. Keep the G6 FWD, but give it an AWD option. Make AWD an option on all pontiac car models. Also the guy is wrong in saying that trucks are necessary in any successful auto brand. This is a myth, especially in the era of rising gas prices. Part of the problem with Pontiac is a performance CAR division began to incorporate SUVs more and more.

The fact that GM was trying to refocus on the SUVs shows how dumb they were in the first place. It is finally good that they realize that SUVs sales are going to go down with gas prices going up. Gas prices are only going to go up in the future.

Taking Pontiacs largest market is in Chicago, and Chicago is the big market for the G6 having rear wheel drive across the brand would be a mistake. The G6 has basically cracked into the same midsize market as the Altima, which is a market GM was almost nonexistant in before. But having an AWD/RWD model for the G8, Solstice and GTO/FIREBIRD/WHATEVER would be a better option. The one problem I think is with the G5. They can do FWD performance oriented compact to compete with the Japanese pocket rockets. Instead of the Cobalt ripoff it currently is. Small sporty cars is definately a problem with GM right now accross the board, and this includes fuel economy.

Actually it is a WEIGHT issue. Weight can effect horsepower. By the way. My dad has a the i-4 G6. Personally I like it quite a bit, so much so I am buying one this week. The G6 is probably the best mid-size car that GM has released in years, and probably the first time they put out something on par with thier competitors (in this case I think the closest comparison is the Nissan Altima). I know it may not have as much kick as the V6, but it is still more then enough pickup for a non-enthusiat. Though I think the V6 is a GREAT model.

Actually do not be suprised if milage ratings are down accross the board, on all vehicle brands and all vehicles. EPA changed the methadology for measuring MPG to reflect real world driving conditions. This is not a real change, almost everything in the 2007 is identical to the 2006. The only thing thats changed is EPA has a better grasp on setting the milage ratings.

This is where I would do some eliminating. I would eliminate either the Chevy truck line or GMC altogether. I would also restrict ONE line to producing luxury SUVs. I would consolidate Cadillac and Buick (why two luxury lines anyway?). I would widen the Caddy line a little. I would restrict Pontiac to performance oriented cars. I would transform Saturn into a Scion competitor. It is based on a similiar concept anyway. Most importantly FEWER SUVs. Maybe GMC and a luxury SUVs from Caddy, and thats it. No Pontiac SUVs, No Saab SUVs, No Saturn SUVs. Get rid of Hummer. The period of cheap gas prices are over. Hummer is going to be more and more of a burden as gas prices rise. Also the person who wrote this article is way off with the diminishing quality of Chevy, the quality has VASTLY improved over the last 10 years and the reliability ratings show it. The only problem is the minivans, which have long needed to be completely redesigned. Everything under Chevy is bad idea as it is GMs most generic brand. Being generic is NOT what GM needs at the moment. It needs the Chevy brand, but incorperating pontiac and buick under it is damaging. Eliminating Buick would be a good idea and widening the Caddy line on the other hand would work.

Actually I would even argue the Cobalt is a better looking car. GM should have done better. They could have introduced a nice pocket rocket with better design cues. The G5 needless to say is the least interesting of the new introductions. The G6 and Solstice were both steps in the right direction, the G5 could have been a step in the right direction, but instead it is just a Cobalt with the pontiac grill. With that being said, somebody said Pontiac's top market is Chicago. I will say that is the truth. Pontiac has done a great job with the G6 and it is selling pretty well in Chicago (though the generous incentives some dealers offer is part of this). But this is partially because it offers a cheaper alternative to the Altima, which is also an incredibly popular car in Chicago. That is part of the reason having the front wheel drive mid-size sedan with a v6 and i-4 with decent horsepower helps. But I will say the G5 is not going to do well. I really do not see it selling well. People will go into the dealer and leave with a g6 or vibe.

Retro is something that the US has over the Japanese. But is something that can only be used in limited amounts. I would say that sports cars (especially the mustang and its pony car brethren) is something that the big three can push the retro car feel. People even in thier twenties know the pony car look and prefer it. But with sedans GM and the other big three need to look modern, classy and sporty. Three things that are tough to pull off. Chrysler has probably done the best job at this. Largely because thier cars do a good job at striking a balance. The 300 does well, because it is not retro, but because it resembles a british luxury car. I think Pontiac has made the right move with the Solstice. But I think for every right move they make, they make about three design moves which are wrong. This can especially be said with the Chevy division, which has been overall bland in its design cues. I can fault ford for much of the same. Pontiac and Cadillac have done a better job with thier designs, but not nearly as well as the Chrysler. Additionally the continued focus of GM on SUVs is a HUGE mistake. Gas prices will not be going down ANYTIME in the near future. If anything they will continue to go up as China and India become more competitive in the Oil market. The problem is when Americans move out of SUVs they tend to move towards the Japanese as far as cars. It is not that the Japanese have a corner on design, but design is the only thing that can entice drivers to buy american cars in addition to comparitive reliability and pricing. Chrysler has exploited this to a significant degree of success. The Performance line (Dodge) and the semi-luxury line (Chrysler) have done very well while GM and Ford have floundered. They focus on well designed vehicles, instead of following the Japanese Pack. Proving that if you do your own thing well enough you can survive. I think GM can do well by making using pontiac for ultra-modern designs and giving them the performance to back the cars up. I think they are doing what they need to do with Cadillacs. Chevy is hard division to crack, but I think it can be used as a division to blend modern and retro designs (the HHR is a step in the right direction). The bland designs of the Cobalt, Malibu, and Impala have hurt them. The reliability of the Malibu has helped. Also they need to dump either GMC or Chevy trucks. There should only be ONE division in GM making trucks and SUVs, it will be a shrinking market segment in the coming years. They need to focus on car design and SUVs need to be an afterthought, not the other way around as it is now. It was thier lack of focus with cars which has put GM and ford in the position they are in now. All the while Chrysler was putting millions of dollars in distinguishing themselves.