HarleyEarl

http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/lutz1e_20050901.htm Auto news E-MAIL THIS STORY | PRINTER-FRIENDLY FORMAT GM's Lutz makes his mark with Solstice Sports car may be start of a risk-taking strategy September 1, 2005 BY MARK PHELAN FREE PRESS AUTO CRITIC After four years at General Motors Corp., Vice Chairman Bob Lutz gets what he asked for. RELATED CONTENT MARK PHELAN: Heart and Solstice Shared parts fit the budget The 2006 Pontiac Solstice is Lutz's baby, and both Pontiac's future and his legacy ride in the little roadster. GM hired Lutz in 2001 to inject style and passion into a humdrum lineup. He challenged the company's designers to create an exciting sub-$20,000 sports car as the first step. The Solstice is that car. If it succeeds, Lutz's legend as one of the industry's great car guys is assured, and GM's future looks a bit brighter. In a conversation with Free Press auto critic Mark Phelan, Lutz talked about his hopes for the Solstice and GM's future. QUESTION: Is it reasonable to say the Solstice is the first car that was completely developed on your watch? ANSWER: The Solstice and the (Chevrolet) HHR and (Hummer) H3 all are. Q: What does the Solstice say about where GM is compared to when you joined the company four years ago? A: I think what the Solstice has is signalvalue inside and outside the company. Inside the company -- even though it's a relatively low-volume car -- it's a tremendous morale builder. I've gotten a lot of e-mails -- and so has (GM Chairman Rick Wagoner) -- from employees saying, "Boy, it feels good to have this company produce a clear-cut winner." It gives our employees faith that yes, we can do it. Taking intelligent risks on exciting new stuff is not only a legitimate strategy, it's the only strategy that will work over time. Playing it safe is going to lose in the long term, because everybody else is taking intelligent risks -- like Chrysler did with the 300. Playing it safe is not an option. Q: Some vehicles have really moved the needle for brands -- the new Cadillacs, the Chrysler 300. Is the Solstice one of those cars that may force people to reevaluate a whole brand? A: The Solstice is supposed to have shock value. Just like the Viper did for Chrysler. Cars like that are a different way of paying for advertising. For the money it took us to do the Solstice -- roughly $230 million to $260 million -- we could have taken a corporate-image ad campaign saying "GM cares." It would have been here today, gone tomorrow, and done very little to change people's minds about GM. People don't buy GM cars because we're nice people. They buy GM cars because they represent great value. Doing something like a Solstice demonstrates that GM and only GM can do a car that's equivalent to a BMW Z4 or even a Porsche Boxster, only instead of charging $45,000, we charge $19,995. It's an enormous bargain. The Solstice is the icon of what's changing at GM. Q: Does each of GM's brands need a flag-in-the-ground car to define it like the Solstice does Pontiac? A: Arguably yes. We've got all kinds of great ideas for things we can do with iconic Hummers without getting bigger and bigger. Cadillac is a no-brainer. Someday we're going to do -- it's definitely in the product plan, but not kicked off yet -- we will do an ultra-luxury sedan involving an engine of more than eight cylinders and costing far more than any Cadillac has ever cost before, but not going into the $300,000 area. As Maybach has proved to our satisfaction, nobody buys those. There aren't enough un-intelligent billionaires around. The world is running out of stupid billionaires. An iconic Chevrolet we have with the Corvette. We can probably go a step beyond Corvette and do the killer all-out performance car that embarrasses the $500,000 and million-dollar performance cars. For Saturn, it will be the Sky roadster. Buick we haven't quite figured out yet. We've got to come up with something there. You know the (Buick) Velite concept -- we just have not identified the necessary capital and engineering resources for it yet. Q: Is the look, the first impression, the most important thing for a car? A: Yes. The inner values of cars today are all close to identical. They all meet government crash regulations. Those are so high now that the difference between least safe and the most safe is (immaterial). The same with quality and durability. Now the differential is how badly do I want the car? That's where, frankly, we've been a little weak. Q: I was amazed at how quickly the perception of Cadillac turned around when the brand got good vehicles. A: Me too. (When) I was at Chrysler, I thought Cadillac was hopeless. Q: How long does it take you to repair people's perception of the other brands? A: It takes time. We shouldn't tell ourselves the Cadillac brand image is fully rehabilitated. It's on an upward slope, but it is by no means where we want it to be. All we can say is it's hit the turning point about three years ago and has been on a gradual upturn. As we measure Pontiac and Buick, they have stopped deteriorating. They have stopped sliding. I'm confident that with cars like the (2006 Buick) Lucerne and the future Buick crossover, that Buick will turn, because they will have beautiful cars. The Lucerne will make a much larger emotional connection with customers than the LaCrosse did. Pontiac, I think the combination of the Solstice, G6 coupe and G6 hardtop convertible will make a difference. I'm so pumped up about this place. I keep haranguing Rick and (GM Chief Financial Officer John Devine), asking, "When can we buy stock again?" I'd hock everything. The bottom line is that this place has more capability than any American automaker, and probably more than any automaker in the world, except probably equal to Toyota.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/review...ts_x.htm?csp=34

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=8449 PLUS

I hope someone will graft a Solstice front on this. The Solstice 'El Camino' could be called the GMC Sprint.

Absolutely fantastic proto....!! Very well done.

http://www.auto123.com/en/info/news/news,v...spy?artid=47951

LOL...I never thought of that....car sex just won't be the same.

I don't know what to think. It makes my eyes go all wonky....like double vision. http://www.gizmag.com/go/2754/1/

New technology banishes window fogging. http://www.channel4.com/4car/news/news-sto...p?news_id=12922

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0...utos-302243.htm

Many publications and tv shows make errors like this. Yesterday a news show was doing a retrospective on cars and their sex appeal in movies. They covered a variety of movies and identified the cars correctly until a movie with Natalie Wood, and they show what is so obviously a 49 era Mercury, which is an iconic car. The narrator identified it as an ugly Chevrolet, but the way Natalie was leaning against it and her co-star stabbing the tire with a knife by her leg was very suggestive and sexy.

Great idea, a kit car Toronado! It's amazing how well this design holds up almost 40 years later.

That bottom one...I did a double take....the rear looks like a Grand Cherokee grafted on....is it based on it?

http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/model/...y.jsp?model=dts GM needs to fire all it's photographers and artistic directors. They rarely showcase their vehicles properly. Often amateur photos of their cars look better.

All that I can find is in Canadian dollars. They are anticipating it to be between the low and mid $30,000.00 range.

Northstar, very nicely done!....seamless...very convincing. I like it alot.

The Alero was one of the few sedans that looked good in it's own right. To me it is equally appealing to a coupe.

Me too!....really liked that car and thanks for posting it.

The B-Class Mercedes Benz will be available in North America to begin with, in the Canadian and Mexican markets. It is a 4-door hatchback, 4 cyl, fwd premium compact. The engine comes in two versions, one with 134 hp and a turbo with 190 hp.

sweet....

That Olds concept is one of my all time favorites. It is timelesss.

The SUV will be with us for some time. There may be a settling out in sales, but let's remember they have been selling like hotcakes. Even as gas was going up prior to recent events, SUV sales were percolating along. The Explorer has enjoyed 400,000 plus sales per year.....most makers would be ecstatic selling half of that. They aren't going anywhere. Many who can afford them can also can afford 3 dollar gas and more. Some may buy a wagon, but I think at the expense of a minivan, not an SUV...I just can't see an SUV customer buying a Mitsubishi wagon. The other vehicle that is being overlooked is the large pickup. It gets the same gas mileage as SUVs. Ford alone sells about a million per year alone. And yet the SUV is singled out. I don't get it.

You know, you think you have seen everything....when you least expect it, someone does something even more bizarre to a car. I was cruising along and something caught me eye: A newer Lexus SC430 in white with, hold onto your thong, aftermarket wheels with a chrome rim and PINK spokes!

Hey rkm.....thanks for hilighting the doors on both sides. It makes so much sense for tradesmen.