Interesting GM Article

[thatjerryguy]

I read this online, and while it's tough not to agree with what Daniel Howes wrote, this part interested me the most:



Bottom line: There's much more riding on the next 30 months of GM product rollouts -- which GM is touting in a series of private previews -- than product czar Bob Lutz's legacy or Chairman Rick Wagoner's job.

The good news is there's not a pathetic Pontiac Aztek anywhere among the shiny models parked under the dome. The new full-size SUVs, set to arrive early next year, are sleeker and more fuel-efficient than their predecessors and, in late 2007, should be available with gas-electric hybrid powertrains.

The trio of mid-sized crossover vehicles from Buick, GMC and Saturn, code-named Lambda, will be late to the hot crossover game -- which means they must be better than their rivals. If the Buick version is any indication, skeptics (like me) are in for a big surprise because this is no flabby Rendezvous.

Same for the next-generation Saturns. There's the Teutonic Aura, a mid-size sedan that drew raves at the Detroit auto show, a Euro-style roadster named Sky, a crossover dubbed "Outlook" and a successor to the compact Ion sedan. Any resemblance to today's plasticky Saturns is, thankfully, coincidental.

The all-new Cadillac CTS is likely to give BMW and Mercedes-Benz engineers heart palpitations, mostly because the planned interior is (like most of the other interiors planned for the coming slug of GM models) a vast improvement over the current model.



Read the entire piece here: http://www.detnews.com/2005/insiders/0506/15/D01-216346.htm



:us:

[thatjerryguy]

Here's another take on the information I posted. This, from http://www.autoextremist.com/page6.shtml#table, sounds even more positive.


In the last two weeks, GM has been bringing in journalists and analysts to the GM Design Dome at their Technical Center in Warren, Michigan, for one-on-one sessions to view most of their upcoming products for the next 30 months. Though we can't provide anything more than sketchy details, suffice to say, anyone counting GM out at this point will be surprised, make that shocked, at the array of new cars and trucks they have in the pipeline. Most impressive was the attention paid to the design of their interiors across the board, something that has been long overdue. And the new products are, in most cases, jaw-droppingly beautiful in their execution and details. Cadillac will continue to gain momentum, with a handsome new Escalade and a stunning new CTS that will flat-out reassert GM's design leadership in the industry. It's that good. And new entries for Chevrolet, Saturn and Buick are remarkably on-target and will be ultra competitive. Saturn dealers in particular should be high-fiving in their showrooms. And the new full-size SUVs and trucks are exceptionally detailed and should set new standards for dynamic performance, ride and efficiency in the category. These new vehicles reflect "Maximum Bob's" influence everywhere you look. Those looking for signs that the Lutzian era has waned in this business will be sorely disappointed, because this new stuff bristles with the kind of detailing and design integrity that have marked his best efforts in the past - and then exceeds them. This is the first time that we have seen hard evidence that all of the work behind the scenes at GM has been worth the effort. The talented men and women working in the trenches at GM have finally been turned loose - and the results are truly extraordinary. Is GM out of the woods yet? Not by a long shot, no. But whereas before they were getting lost on the way to the playing field, they're now well and truly engaged in The Game. And it's about time.


:us:

[97_Saturn_SL2]

Sweetness. :cool:

[dmccreary860]

Hmm, they mention cross-over vehicles, Saturns, and Cadillacs. What about economy cars (besides Saturns), midsize cars, fullsize cars, vans, and trucks? Well, I guess they had to start somewhere, although $60-70k Cadillacs are probably not too big on consumers wish lists. I would have started with the more common vehicles, but maybe Cadillac and Saturn were easiest (smallest) to change first?

Engineering and styling are definitely important, but one of the biggest problems with GM is their suppliers in my opinion, which is something that takes even longer to change.

All suppliers are under pressure to produce the parts as cheaply as they can (they need to turn a profit too). But, it seems as if the Japanese have a higher-quality supply in general.

Of course, a product will only perform as good as it was engineered, so maybe that's an area for improvement as well.

A good example is the CTS-V. I'll pick on that because I was going to get one until I test drove it. Nice car with a lot of features, but combined with all of the problems CTS's have (I think they have about 150 TSB's now), the wheel hop (what fun is that car if I can't do a burnout?), and the fact that it's a GM vehicle with no resale, I skipped it. With some performance upgrades, a 300C is a cheaper, nicer ride! Further picking on Cadillac, I have not seen ANY STS's yet.

GM has screwed up for quite a few years, and it will take some time for that brand image to change in the consumers minds.

[Jeff P]

Eh we'll see. GM's always got great stuff "in the pipeline" but they always end up too late or not as good as the competition. I can think of one GM vehicle that is world-class, the Corvette. Is there a single other model they make that is clearly on par or better than the competition?

Sure the new midsizers might be good - but if they're not significantly better than the current Accord, they're worthless. Because Honda will have a brand new Accord in 3 years that'll be even better than the current one. Same goes for the crossover utes. How many times has a highly touted new product come out only to meet with lackluster sales and pitiful showings in magazine comparos? Too many times.

I bet those trucks will have "Displacement on Demand", that GM's been talking about for at least 5 years. Great, but Chrysler and Honda both beat 'em to it when it actually came to selling cars with it.

I just have this silly feeling that all of these products are going to end up a day late and a dollar short. I'd love it if they prove me wrong, but their track record doesn't make me optimistic.

jeff

[edwilson13185]

I completely agree with the last post.

I'd be shocked, in a good way, if all of this was true. But I've heard this song and dance before too many times. The 2004 Pontiac Grand Prix, the '05 Malibu and G6, were all supposed to have premium interiors that could match the best in the class. They didn't.

I think the Aura is a very nice-looking car, but its interior had better be more premium than the G6 or the Malibu if they want it to compete. And they're going to have to keep their cars fresh. They can't just release a model and then let it go for ten years with only minor facelifts, like they've done for the last decade.

I hope they surprise me, but I'm not gonna hold my breath.

[BobL]

Hyundai earned a reputation for building POS cars with their 80's Excel models.

The first thing Finbarr O'Neill did was to insure basic quality in each vehicle. GM needs to stop worrying so much about styling and gadgets. They first need to restore quality and stand behind it with a meaningful warranty.

Once the basics are right, it's time to focus on styling & gadgets.

GM's still feeling the fallout from their catastrophic attempt to inplement diesels in the 80's.

Now, they had an ad campaign saying how much was learned. Bull feces - take the CVT transmission to see how well they learned.

This is a crucial time for GM. If they don't get it right fast, it's Chapter 11 time.

[Citation84]

These vehicles were seen by the press writing about them @ GM's design studios. This isn't as if the publicity dept. at GM is writing the stockholder's meeting speeches. This isn't a GM press release.[Though some of these so called journalists just use the copy given to them by the companies].
Autoextremist is not a yes man for GM. Nor is the Detroit News, though Detroit is an industry town.
While everything said above is true [except that TSBs are NOT an indicator of 'problems" but tech bulletins for the mechanics that have to work on the cars. ALL brands issue TSBs to make it easier for diagnosing problems that may or may not crop up in the field. Check ALLDATA for TSBs on the 300].
For a cynical press that loves to slam GM can we not just accept some GOOD NEWS from the hacks for once?

[thatjerryguy]

Citation84, you beat me to it. While I can agree with some people's reservations and wait-and-see attitudes, like you mentioned, the reaction to GMs future models came from automotive journalists (often GM's harshest critics) and not GM itself. As for quality, GM has been doing quite well as of late. And if the media was a little more even-handed in reporting vehicle recalls, people would see the makes and models that are media darlings (Honda and Toyota, for example) aren't exactly bulletproof. I think these reports are good news, and GM deserves some good news.

:us:

[frankski]

Citation84, you beat me to it. While I can agree with some people's reservations and wait-and-see attitudes, like you mentioned, the reaction to GMs future models came from automotive journalists (often GM's harshest critics) and not GM itself. As for quality, GM has been doing quite well as of late. And if the media was a little more even-handed in reporting vehicle recalls, people would see the makes and models that are media darlings (Honda and Toyota, for example) aren't exactly bulletproof. I think these reports are good news, and GM deserves some good news.

:us:

I too am very suspicious against GM, personnally I dont like the "fact" they turned Saturn into just another GM brand, but being objectively, I must admit they probably had no other choice if Saturn is to survive. (ie I hate it but in the end its they only option)

That said, I'll believe it when I see it :)

Still, I am confident, because I heard reports here in Canada about Saturn's future models from auto journalist that where at a private GM/Saturn show and these journalists were really never saying good things about Saturn in the past. (ie In the past I heard a lot of the words "Saturn", "Kia", "Hyunday" in the same sentences...) In all cases they said be prepared for a big positive surprise. One of the journalist said, the "new" Saturn's its like a new company from scratch. Coming from these guys, I must say I can't wait to see the new models.

Frankski

[Citation84]

This is good news. I hope they stick it to the press right between the eyes.
BTW: Chrysler 300 has 7 recalls [4 for safety] and 29 TSBs issued for it....

[LTS]

There are a few things that I take into account reading these things.. and those are:

First, it's great they have new vehicles, but so does the competition. If their vehicle of 2007 compares to a leading competitor of 05 it's a safe bet that they will still be sucking up the rear. Hopefully they will be setting the trends, not following them.

Second, improvements come at a cost. They may make the cars nice and shiny but will people buy them?

Third, they aren't here yet. Until they are speculation is grand, but the higher you create the anticipation the farther people fall if you fail to meet expectations.

We'll see what happens. You can only judge them on the cars that you can buy. Anything in the future can be changed.

[dmccreary860]

This is good news. I hope they stick it to the press right between the eyes.
BTW: Chrysler 300 has 7 recalls [4 for safety] and 29 TSBs issued for it....

Your rationale of "TSB's just being a guide for the techs who may encounter these problems" is bullcrap. Look at ALLDATA for a definition of TSB. If a car is designed correctly, manufactured correctly, and composed of quality components that don't break, then there would be no need for these TSB's.

A tech shouldn't have to be performing "Engine - New Long Block Installation Precaution" if the engine worked correctly in the first place!

Here's the TSB list for the 2003 CTS - Who would want to buy this POS knowing that you could encounter the following:

04-03-10-001A NOV 04 Tires - Puncture Repair Procedures
04-08-46-003 NOV 04 OnStar(R) - Unable to Connect to OnStar (Alaska Only)
02-08-46-010E NOV 04 OnStar(R) - French Canadian Voice Recognition
99-08-51-007B NOV 04 Wheels - Aluminum Wheel Refinishing
03-07-29-004A NOV 04 M/T - Operational Characteristics
02-06-03-006B NOV 04 Electrical - Testing Prior to Alternator/Battery R&R
04-03-10-013 OCT 04 Drivetrain - Rear Drive Characteristics/Winter Tires
01-01-38-006D SEP 04 A/C - R-134a System Flushing Procedures
03-01-38-019A SEP 04 A/C - Underhood Rattle Noise on Hard Acceleration
04-07-30-037 SEP 04 A/T - Dexron® III(R) (H-Revision) Specification Upgrade
02-07-30-052C SEP 04 A/T - Fluid Flushing Procedure/Tool
00-08-48-005A SEP 04 Body - Distortion in Outer Surface of Vehicle Glass
04-06-04-051A SEP 04 Fuel System - Maintenance Cleaning of Fuel Injectors
01-07-31-002A SEP 04 M/T - Improved Hydraulic Clutch Bleeding Procedure
99-09-40-005B SEP 04 Restraint System - Seat Belt Extender Availability
01-07-30-036D SEP 04 Transmission Controls - DTC P0756 Diagnostic Tips
04-03-10-012 SEP 04 Wheels - Chrome Wheel Pitting/Brake Dust Accumulation
02-07-30-002A AUG 04 A/T - 5L40E/5L50E Operating Characteristics
01-07-30-010A AUG 04 A/T - Torque Converter Replacement Guideline
04-07-30-033 AUG 04 A/T - 4T65-E, No Reverse Hot/Slips in Reverse
02-06-03-008A JUL 04 Charging System - Operational Characteristics
00-00-89-027B JUL 04 Interior - Odor Elimination
04-07-30-030 JUL 04 A/T - 4T65-E Final Drive Assembly Precaution
02-06-03-010A JUL 04 Battery - Parasitic Drain
04-01-39-008 JUN 04 A/C - Limited Control of Defroster Temperature
04-06-00-047 JUN 04 Fuel - Top Tier Detergent Gasoline Information
04-07-30-028 JUN 04 A/T - Reverse Servo Cover Seal Leak
00-06-01-026A JUN 04 Engine - New Long Block Installation Precaution
02-08-44-007A JUN 04 XM Radio/OnStar - Problems W/Cloth or Vinyl Roofs
00-03-10-002C JUN 04 Wheels - Chemical Stains on Chrome Wheels
01-07-30-030A MAY 04 A/T - 4L60-E/4L65-E Harsh 1-2 Upshift
04-06-04-036 MAY 04 Engine Controls - Reprogramming Warranty Info.
00-05-22-002D MAY 04 Brakes - Service Procedures/Warranty Guidelines
04-07-30-023 MAY 04 A/T - 4L60-E/4L65-E New Pump/Seal/Case/Service
04-08-50-009 APR 04 Interior - Front Seat Heater Cold/Inoperative
03-08-64-027A APR 04 Body - Front/Rear Door Outer Window Seal Discoloring
04-06-02-003 APR 04 Engine BlockHeater - Extension Cord Availability
02-08-52-004C APR 04 Keyless Entry - Remote Transmitter Malfunctions
04-06-01-013 APR 04 Engine - Serpentine Drive Belt Wear Information
03-02-36-001A MAR 04 Steering - 'Service Steering' Message ON/DTC C0450/C1241
04-09-40-002 MAR 04 Interior - Seat Belt Stop Button Availability
04-06-05-002 MAR 04 Exhaust System - Rattle/Buzz from Engine Compartment
04-07-30-012 MAR 04 A/T - 5L40-E/5L50E Fluid Checking Procedure
04033 MAR 04 Engine Controls - MIL ON/DTC PO602 Set
04-08-66-003 MAR 04 Body - Rear Compartment Lid Doesn't 'Pop-Open' Enough
04-06-03-003 MAR 04 Battery - Intermittently Goes Dead Overnight
00-06-02-006A FEB 04 Cooling System - Coolant Information
02-07-30-001A FEB 04 A/T - 4L60E and 4L65E DTC P0894/P1870 Diagnostics
04-07-30-006 FEB 04 A/T - 4L65E, 4L60E, 4L60, 200-4R Oil Pump Spring
03-02-35-002A FEB 04 Interior/Steering - Wood Steering Wheel Trim Scratched
01-07-30-038B JAN 04 A/T - 4L60-E/4L65-E MIL ON/DTC P0757/Slipping
03-07-30-059A JAN 04 A/T - Fluid Leaks/Loss of DRIVE or REVERSE/Noises
04-08-64-001 JAN 04 Body - Itching/Squeaking Noises From Door Weatherstrip
02-06-05-004A JAN 04 Emissions - Catalytic Converter Damage/Misfire Codes Set
04-01-37-001 JAN 04 A/C - Control Knob Replacement Availability
02-08-48-001A DEC 03 Windows/Glass - Urethane Adhesive Usage
03-05-23-006 NOV 03 Brakes - Revised Front Caliper Bolt Torque
03-08-64-026B NOV 03 Body - Front Side Window Applique Faded/Discolored
01-08-42-001A NOV 03 Lighting - Lamp Condensation/Replacement Guidelines
01-01-38-013A OCT 03 A/C - Unnecessary Compressor Replacement
03-08-64-037 OCT 03 Body - Front Side Window Applique Discolored/Faded
03-07-30-024A AUG 03 A/T - No Reverse Condition
03-08-64-026 AUG 03 Body - Front/Rear Door Applique Discolored/Mottled
03-08-110-004 AUG 03 Interior - Rattle/Buzz From Rear Window Shelf
03-00-89-021 JUL 03 Instruments - DIC Perceived Fuel Economy Settings
03-02-36-002 JUL 03 Steering - Revised Service Procedures
03-09-41-003 JUL 03 Restraint System - Proper Air Bag System Diagnosis
01-06-01-011A JUL 03 Engine - Oil Consumption Information
01-01-39-003A JUL 03 A/C - Catastrophic Compressor Failure Debris Removal
03-09-40-001A JUN 03 Interior - Seat Belt Squeaking Noise
03-08-49-010 JUN 03 Instruments - Fuel Gauge Reads EMPTY After Fill-Up
03-04-20-004 JUN 03 Drivetrain - Revised Rear Axle Torsional Backlash Specs.
03-07-30-027 JUN 03 A/T - Oil Cooler Flushing Frequently Asked Questions
01-08-46-002C JUN 03 Navigation/GPS System - OnStar(R) Module Programming
03-08-49-007 MAY 03 Instruments - Revised Service Information
03-08-44-008 MAY 03 Audio System - No Sound From Right Speakers
03-06-02-003 MAY 03 Engine - Block Heater Availability
99-08-52-005A MAY 03 Keyless Entry System - Operational Characteristics
03-08-50-011 MAY 03 Seat Track - Adjuster/Actuators/Cables Availability
03-06-02-003 APR 03 Engine - Block Heater Installation Precaution
03-08-48-002 MAR 03 Body - Windshield Stress Cracking
03-08-43-001 MAR 03 Wipers - Passenger Wiper Arm Contacts Hood
99-01-39-007B MAR 03 A/C - Automatic A/C Functional Description
03-01-38-001 MAR 03 A/C - System Sealers/Leak Detection Guidelines
01-05-23-001A MAR 03 Brakes - Brake Rotor Lateral Runout Correction
02-08-42-001A MAR 03 Lighting - Polycarbonate Headlamp Damage Prevention
03-04-17-003 FEB 03 A/T, M/T - Shifter Vibration/Noise
03-04-17-004 FEB 03 Drivetrain - Revised Propeller Shaft Replacement
03-08-66-003 FEB 03 Body - High Deck Lid Pull Down Effort
03-02-35-001 FEB 03 Steering Column - Clunk/Loose Feeling
99-07-30-017A FEB 03 A/T - Oil Cooler Flushing/Flow Check Procedures
03-06-01-003 FEB 03 Engine/Transmission - Flexplate/Flywheel Replacement
99-08-64-016A JAN 03 Body - Weatherstrip Maintenance
03-06-04-012 JAN 03 Electrical - Wiring Harness Inspection Recommendations
03-08-42-001 JAN 03 Lighting - Dome Lamp Replacement Procedure Update
02-03-10-008 DEC 02 Wheels/Tires - Recommended Wheel Nut Torque
02-06-01-028 AUG 02 Engine - Crankcase Flushing Recommendations
02-07-30-028 JUN 02 A/T - Serial Number/Site Code Locations/Identification
02-09-41-001 JUN 02 Computers & Controls - DTC's Set When Replacing Modules
02-06-01-026 JUN 02 Engine - Identification Information
02-06-01-017 MAY 02 Engine Mount - Hollow Underbody Thump Noise
02-01-37-003 MAR 02 A/C - Carpet Wet On Front Passenger Side
02-06-04-013 MAR 02 PCM - MIL ON/DTC P0602 Set
02-08-66-003 MAR 02 Trunk - Popping/Oil Canning Noise
99-00-89-019B FEB 02 Warranty - Parts Return Program Explained



I'll take that 300C thank you!

Back to the topic now.

[cdp326]

I am salivating and my pulse is sped up over these new GM vehicles. I cannot WAIT to see pics. I am especially looking forward to the new full size PU's/SUV's, as pickups are always popular, and considering how GM kicked everyone's @$$ in 98-00 when they debuted the Silverado/Tahoe/Suburban/Sierra/Yukon/Yukon XL/Escalade, the new ones will likely be damn goodl. :cool:
I find it interesting-in a good way-that Buick, GMC and Saturn are the ones getting the Lambda vehicles. :yes:

[97_Saturn_SL2]

dmc,

You do realize that the engine in the '03 CTS is gone already? There were issues with the cranks or something early on, but that engine was the old 54 degree six from Opel/GM Europe. The new CTS engines have nothing to do with it.

The CTS has also been available to the public for a year or two longer than the 300c (which, IMO, is sinfully ugly, not to mention bigger and heavier than a CTS). That could partially explain the longer list (more time to uncover issues). The '03 CTSs have been on the road for around 3 years now; quite a bit longer than the 300s...

The CTS is, IMO, a superior car in a slightly different class. The "hemi" makes it faster than a non-V CTS, but the 3.6L 255 hp CTS is no slouch (and you can get a six speed manual). 0-60 in the mid six second range vs. the high five second range.

Comparing the SRT-8 (slightly less ugly) to the CTS-V, the situation is similar. The SRT-8 does give similar but slightly slower performance (for ~10 grand less!), but the handling is inferior, and again, it is automatic-only. It is a bigger car with a slightly different aim, more a power-cruiser than a sports sedan. Maybe think AMG Mercedes vs. BMW M as an analogy.

All that being said, I could not drive a 300 (or any LX car) because of the hideous looks (and the plump weight). And the claustrophobic feel imparted by the squashed greenhouse and high beltline. But that is why there is such variety in the auto world...

BTW, I'm not sure what the heck any of this has to do with some articles (not GM statements, but articles written by journalists who have seen the upcoming products first hand) about future vehicles from the General...

:hmpf:

Also, in scanning the list there, it looks like you've got some general TSBs mixed in or something. The CTS does not have the 4L60 or 4L65 transmission (4 speed autos). It has the 5L40 five speed automatic, or a five speed manual (earlier cars) or a six speed manual (current cars). What gives?

[dmccreary860]

I mention the CTS because the first article posted on this topic explicitly calls it out in the last paragraph. If you don't believe my topics have relevance, then why respond with more off-topic stuff yourself?

I didn't make the TSB's - I just copied them from ALLDATA. Compared to an '03 Camry or Accord, the list for the CTS is 3 TIMES AS LONG !!!

You and Citation must work for GM!

BTW - there are a lot of issues with the Lotus-designed L81. The latest one (for me personally) are the valve guides that allow my '02 L300 with 32k miles to smoke like crazy on startup. Guess what - there's a Saturn TSB for that one too!

[97_Saturn_SL2]

I think you mean L61, not L81, with which Lotus was involved. As for Alldata.com, I've never used the site. I wasn't accusing you of making the list (I figured you got it from some online source). I'm just saying that the 4L60s were never in the CTS, so when they show up on the list, it makes me wonder about the rest of it. Probably just some sort of data entry/filtering error, but...

And I do work for GM (formerly, briefly did emissions control calibration on the H3 for '07; now sadly not in Milford - working for the Allison Transmission Division back home in Indiana). I thought we had established that already. That's why I was able to talk with the GM's global technical fellow for catalytic converters and emissions architecture when you posted about removing your cats (and about cats being essentially a racket put on by the automakers). But we don't need to rehash all of that. :)

And, as someone mentioned above, some TSBs are there to clarify to a technician the proper/best way to remedy a problem. They aren't always put out just to bring attention to an issue that has popped up. And again, the CTS has a year or two longer on the market than your beloved 300C. Makes sense to me that it would have more TSBs.

[dmccreary860]

You're obviously an argumentative type that always believes you're right.

You must fit in pretty well at GM then (Our products are the BEST ;) - That's why we don't need to improve anything)!

GM doesn't have time or resources to improve their products - they are too busy making TSB's for the existing shoddy ones!

I would buy GM again in the future if they made some quality products (I've had three previously).

Oh - I didn't buy a 300C. With a kid on the way I bought an Acura NSX! Kind of like the Porsche advertisement says - "The more kids you have, the more practical it becomes."


The L61 and L81 are both Lotus-Designed 54-degree V6's with the same basic architecture (The same basic engine in the Opel Omega's, Opel Vectra's, Saab 9-5's, Cadillac Catera's, and Saturn L300's.)

[97_Saturn_SL2]

Actually, I goofed. I was thinking L200. The L61 is NOT a V6; the L61 is an ecotec four cylinder, I believe. You were right the first time with L81. My bad.

As for being the argumentative type, well, it seems to take one to know one. :)

I don't think I'm always right (see 4 lines above this one). But some people are stuck in GM bashing mode, as it seems to be the norm these days (despite the fact that its quality is quite good, and is unquestionably better than Ford and DCX and many others - see below - who mysteriously get a pass from everyone). I like to chime in for the home team when I can. If you worked for Pepsi, and someone told you some bogus stuff about Pepsi sucking and Coke rules, you might speak up to support your company too. (For the record, Pepsi is way better than Coke). :yes:

If you want to resort to childishness, well, what can I say...

GM doesn't have time or resources to improve their products - they are too busy making TSB's for the existing shoddy ones! :no:

For a different take than the standard BS about GM not having quality and making shoddy cars, take a look here:

http://www.chirpthird.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2391

This guy is a long time employee of GM who was involved with some of the high performance stuff in the past and who now handles Chevy and Hummer operations at auto shows and special events like that. He posts on a board for F-body owners (similar to Saturnfans.com, but much much larger), and in other places as well, and deals face to face - and on the net - with past, present, and future customers (fans and detractors) all the time.

I'm wanting to contact him here at work and get him to push the marketing crowd to get some of this stuff out.

BTW, how did you jump from looking at CTSs and 300Cs to an NSX?! Did you buy a new or used NSX? A most excellent car, for sure (seriously), though totally dominated by the current 911 and Corvette, especially for the price (ah, 90 grand or so?). They still catch my eye on the rare occasionn that I see one. I kinda hope you bought a used one, but it's a free country. Are you going to gut the cat on it? :hmpf:

[unkle bik]

Fight nice, guyz.
Or unkle bik won't take either of you out for ice cream after dinner. :D

[97_Saturn_SL2]

:redface:

Coldstone Creamery, please!

[unkle bik]

How about WooCity? :cake:

[thatjerryguy]

Fight nice, guyz.
Or unkle bik won't take either of you out for ice cream after dinner. :D

Oooooh, can I come for ice cream, too! Please oh please oh please! :D

:us:

[dmccreary860]

How's this for childishness - I apologize for my last post slamming another member.

After looking at Charlie's message about more and more personal attacks on other members, I admit that I've posted some hurtful (yet often humerous remarks) to others and to GM. As my $25k GM product is currently sitting in the shop in need of an upper head job to fix a premature oil-burning problem (along with power door lock actuators that just died yesterday and a leaking steering rack), I am pretty disappointed with GM and it is hard for me to tolerate members that believe GM is equal to or better than their competitors in terms of quality.

As an engineer I know that mechanical objects break. Every product has issues, but GM as a whole has lesser-quality products than their competitors. NO ARGUMENTS ON THAT ONE.

It also upsets me that "another" American company is suffering because of management problems. I look at the mentality of people in positions of power and I often find that they are arrogant, short-sighted, and greedy. That's what tends to lead to the problems GM is having.

I hope GM does recover in the future, and I would happily purchase more vehicles from them if they improve their product over their competitors. Apparently I'm not the only one thinking this....

[dmccreary860]

BTW, how did you jump from looking at CTSs and 300Cs to an NSX?!

I'm kinda fortunate enough to be in the financial position I'm in now, and also fortunate to have an understanding wife. Until my wife got her license a few months ago, it was getting hard justifying the 6 cars in our "fleet." :D

There is no "perfect" car - That's why you need a truck, SUV, sedan, convertible, and sports car (along with a minivan for the wife so she doesn't get yours dirty)!

[seamus1066]

It also upsets me that "another" American company is suffering because of management problems. I look at the mentality of people in positions of power and I often find that they are arrogant, short-sighted, and greedy. That's what tends to lead to the problems GM is having.

I hope GM does recover in the future, and I would happily purchase more vehicles from them if they improve their product over their competitors. Apparently I'm not the only one thinking this....

As a production employee of GM all I can say is thanks....Thanks for not laying the blame only at the feet of those who put the parts on the car. I really do tire of those who blame the production workers and never management. As I do the best job I can with the parts I am given to put on the car.

If management can get their act together we can come back. The quailty in the plants has improved to above industry standards. Though without good products to build, and good parts from suppliers, I as an production employee can only do so much.

[97_Saturn_SL2]

Did you guys have a look at the link I provided? The "initial quality surveys" have GM right on top of Honda and Toyota. (BTW, the link to the thread I listed above has some interesting info, beyond the little blurb about quality - check it out when you get a chance)

The JD Power survey that asks for problems experienced by the original buy after 3 years of ownership has Toyota and Honda (and Porsche, but they barely count) in the lead around ~210 "problems" per hundred vehicles (240 for Porsche). GM was around 264, and they beat out BMW, Nissan, Mitsubishi, Ford, DCX, and crushed VW and Hyundai. Remember that this is problems per 100 vehicles, so 210 translates into an "average" of 2.1 problems per car, and 260 translates into 2.6 problems per car. Over a three year period of ownership. A score of 300 would be 3 problems per car, and so on.

Anyway, if you want to call that "shoddy", I guess go ahead. It just amazes me that GM gets pounded so hard while Ford, Chrysler, Nissan, Mitsu, VW (currently a media darling, despite their relatively bad quality at premium prices), and Hyundai are given a pass by the press.

Yes, Honda and Toyota are the tops in quality. But they are not bulletproof. And as I've said before, GM management, from what I have witnessed, is serious about eliminating what little gap is left. I can only guess that Ford and DCX are also serious about catching up. Clearly Hyundai is working at it (at least on the perceived quality front). VW, I'm not so sure about it. :redface:

And Seamus, it isn't "just the production workers" or "just the management". But it will be a hell of a lot harder to get the last 2% of the way to where we all need to be if the "production workers" look at management as the enemies, and vice versa. GM's plants have improved their productivity and quality tremendously, Seamus, and thank you for that. But don't kid yourself that it didn't take "management" pushing to implement changes (like lessons learned in the joint venture at NUMMI, for example). I believe it is also the case that GM's plants and facilities are among the safest in the world in terms of number of injuries sustained on the job (I think Alcoa, the aluminum supplier, is the only company ahead of GM, and not by much). :cool:

[seamus1066]

And Seamus, it isn't "just the production workers" or "just the management". But it will be a hell of a lot harder to get the last 2% of the way to where we all need to be if the "production workers" look at management as the enemies, and vice versa. GM's plants have improved their productivity and quality tremendously, Seamus, and thank you for that. But don't kid yourself that it didn't take "management" pushing to implement changes (like lessons learned in the joint venture at NUMMI, for example). I believe it is also the case that GM's plants and facilities are among the safest in the world in terms of number of injuries sustained on the job (I think Alcoa, the aluminum supplier, is the only company ahead of GM, and not by much). :cool:

Your correct that the quality has increased. As well as the production effecenticy (3 GM plants were in the top 10 most effecent plants in the US, with the top plant GM's). The "us vs them" is a problem and it stems from both sides. Look at the current problem....Management blames the woes on the cost of healthcare for the union employees. You do not hear them taking on any of the fault for approving lack luster cars and trucks. Nor coming in last to the party most of the time. Yes healthcare cost are high...they are for everybody..And yes last year we had a big increase in the employees cost for the healthcare co-pays. Though it still doesn't stem the tide of healthcare cost increases. Until both sides stop blaming the other the final 2% will never be acheived. And I am not sure that will happen. As it is easier to blame one side than it is to accept your own actions for the downfall.

As to the safety...I do believe you are correct. All of the major accidents within the Company are sent out to every plant and every team gets a copy of it. Of all the ones I have read in the past several years. I would say that 99% of them happen because someone bypasses safety procedures. The rest are things that just happen and corrections are put into place.

[Citation84]

Seamus: always love to read your posts. They're always informative and well written and from an insider's point of view.
Just got past the chapter in "Chrome Colossus" about the Union and GM in the late 30s. The unions and the companies created this adversarial relationship from the first and the spirit of it continues :Ine the 30s; tear gas and corporate spies, un sustainable production speed on the part of GM and thuggery violence and sabotage on the part of the workers. It's no surprise they've both created a monster.
It was the same in the 70s. Both mgmt. and labor with a death grip on each others throats squeezing the corporation for the last dime from both ends and turning out some of worst product in automotive history. In the meantime, beyond the purpose of satisfying the stockholder, both sides forgot that the whole point of existence was to build a good car.
Today, the old GM/domestic industry sucks business is something "everyone knows". It's part of urban legend no matter HOW GOOD GM gets. It's almost a knee jerk response. People buying Big Two products seem to LOOK for something to complain about and seem happy when their lack of trust is validated by a problem no matter how small. It's getting tiresome after thirty friggin years of people saying the same thing. It may have been true back then but it's being blown way the H out of proportion today.
The domestics are LESS troublesome than the European brands according to the data Consumer Reports has tracked for over 20 years. The problems per 100 cars are minimally greater than the Japanese makes as 97-Saturn SL 2 said above re: the JD Power surveys, and have trended along sigificantly better than the Euro brands for YEARS, but people still want to talk smack about how horrible our cars are.
After 5 years VWs and other European cars have double the problems the US and Japanese brands do according to CR with VW being the WORST offender.
Cars in CR's tests used to average 10-12 defects per sample. Now it's down to 1 or 2, . After that, it's just trying to find something to be unhappy about.
People don't like to be proven wrong in their assumptions.

[Citation84]

[.....

[s3nfo]

I'll believe GM is making better cars when I can see them in person.......Oh, and at least 2 years of maintenance history too!

[GR898SL2]

The proof will be what product GM debuts at NAIAS '06. That's when we'll know whether the General is for real or if it's just another case of the boy who cried wolf, the wolf being Toyota. What makes me consider a strong case for the former is that the Freep's Howes and the AutoExtremist (the links provided by jerryguy) aren't exactly cheerleaders for GM nor are they shy about expressing skepticism. In the past, media hype toward new vehicles has come from the manufacturer itself through their public relations spin doctors and advertising budgets. This time out, it's the critics who are saying, "Maybe GM really has turned the corner!" We shall see.

:flag:

[Citation84]

GR898SL2 : Precisely. This article was not written by GM's PR hacks. Given the slagging off GM usually gets by the press, using any excuse to trot out the same buzz words and write easy copy, this report is encouraging.

[AH-HA]

I was fortunate enough to be invited to attend the preview and left utterly impressed with what GM has in the pipeline over the next 30 months. Saturn fans should be particularly excited as it will finally have a lineup that it deserves. Seriously, if I had the money, I'd look into buying into a Saturn dealership.

[John10]

AH-HA despite the relative scarcity of your posts you have proven in the past that you know what you are talking about and have access to good information well in advance of most of the rest of us. I certainly hope you have this one nailed correctly.

[VTHokie00SL2]

I was fortunate enough to be invited to attend the preview and left utterly impressed with what GM has in the pipeline over the next 30 months. Saturn fans should be particularly excited as it will finally have a lineup that it deserves. Seriously, if I had the money, I'd look into buying into a Saturn dealership.

Haven't we already seen what's coming within the next 30 months? (Basically, the Sky and Aura)

[AH-HA]

Haven't we already seen what's coming within the next 30 months? (Basically, the Sky and Aura)

You forgot some. ;)

[ttreibel]

Nice to see a little good news for GM. TSB's don't necessarily mean that a car or truck are POS's I think they more reflect what the customer expects.

[K-1]

You forgot some. ;)
"some"? Are you saying there's more than just the Sky, Aura, and Outlook coming? That would be quite a surprise.

[spencerb]

Haven't we already seen what's coming within the next 30 months? (Basically, the Sky and Aura)
Sky, Aura, Outlook, new ION, new VUE, and a new minivan/crossover.

[JerryHughes]

Of course, a product will only perform as good as it was engineered, so maybe that's an area for improvement as well. A good example is the CTS-V. I'll pick on that because I was going to get one until I test drove it. Nice car with a lot of features, but combined with all of the problems CTS's have (I think they have about 150 TSB's now), the wheel hop (what fun is that car if I can't do a burnout?), and the fact that it's a GM vehicle with no resale, I skipped it. GM has screwed up for quite a few years, and it will take some time for that brand image to change in the consumers minds.

I hope GM does something to improve the CTS's "fit-and-finish"! Man, looking down the side of that car, all you see are dips, warps, die pull at the door handles, etc.. Chrysler's cheap, little PT Cruiser, although not a Cadillac, has much better fit-and-finish and only costs a fraction!

Jerry

[Brad LeBosse]

BTW - there are a lot of issues with the Lotus-designed L81. The latest one (for me personally) are the valve guides that allow my '02 L300 with 32k miles to smoke like crazy on startup. Guess what - there's a Saturn TSB for that one too!

Can you tell me what this TSB is about and if it applies to my 2005 L300 which also has the L81 V6 engine? I thought the L81 was supposed to be a good engine with great power and gas mileage? AM I missing something here as usual?

[VTHokie00SL2]

I still say bring back the S Series! ;) Honestly, why can't they make a sleek, sporty looking, reliable economy car anymore? Why do all cars these days seem to have weird lines, sharp angles, bulbous rooflines and oversized, awkward looking light fixtures? The S Series had such a clean design compared to the crap you see today.

If the polymer side panels are gone for good, I wish some automaker could come up with something better than easily dented thin sheetmetal. I mean come on, surely innovation isn't a thing of the past. What happened to the original engineers who worked for the "real" Saturn when it really was a "different kind of company"? Is GM no longer capable of thinking outside of the box? Sorry, but I can't get too excited about warmed over Opels with a Saturn label on them.

[GR898SL2]

Sky, Aura, Outlook, new ION, new VUE, and a new minivan/crossover.

Thirty months covers everything right up through the end of MY 2008. I wouldn't be shocked to see a Red Line version of Sky and Aura and the Green Line variants of Aura and Vue to be available before the end of CY 2007.:D

:flag:

[hugh]

Brad LeB;
I see you have not received a reply re TSB for smoking L81 engines,so I checked out my data base. You can relax.

The only TSB I can find that has anything remotely connected to the subject is titled "Excessive oil consumption and blue smoke on acceleration".....TSB#050601003A,issued May,2005. It is applicable to the L61 engine (2.2 4 cyl) only.