SaturnFans.com Links

Detroit News has put together its list of the top five things to watch in 2006.

The launch advertising for the Saturn brand described a new way of doing business, bringing management and unions together to create a new car company. The brand was not just a thin veneer applied over an existing business; rather, the whole organization was created and aligned to deliver on the brand promise.

For several years, Saturn vehicles have produced the most complaints, both to us and to NHTSA, regarding excessive daytime running lights (DRL) glare. In 1998, NHTSA tested DRLs on three Saturn vehicles and two were found to have intensities in excess of 7000 candela, well above levels that are considered discomforting. All Saturn vehicles that we know of use the cheapest method available to implement DRLs: high beam headlamps operating at reduced voltage.

Despite a so-called commitment to the lean manufacturing model perfected by Toyota, the world’s most successful automaker, I have watched the Big Three automakers consistently fail to adopt lean in any lasting, meaningful way. Why haven't the Big Three seen the light?

I have a few suggestions for infant/toddler car seats for anyone interested. I know the topic of improper fit has come up before because of the anti-submarining rear seat design with the forward anchored seat belts.

From the blogs at NASCAR.com: Penske [is in the process of buying] the Saturn brand from General Motors. I think it is admirable that Roger did that not only because it was a good business decision on his part, but it saves U.S. jobs! Saturn makes some pretty cool cars and I think that GM was way too quick to give up on that brand. Don't be surprised if you see Dodge go away completely in NASCAR competition and the one team left will be running Saturns. I wouldn’t have a problem with that, wou...

Bob Lutz has seen some heaping helpings of General Motors' money since signing on with the corporation in 2001. But even if his turbocharged and intercooled pay packet bought GM only one thing - a reminder that the company had important engineering chops in places like Europe and Asia - it was worth it. Lutz is no dummy. Although he'd publicly told everyone what they thought they wanted to hear - that GM would engineer cars in North America for North American consumption - he had long since wise...

I sent a letter the editor of Automotive News a couple of weeks ago regarding their October 6th article about steel-bodied Saturns.

Instead of Saturn being the template it was intended to be for GM, its old ways won out, and Saturn is just another car in an old declining car company. As Toyota perfects the art and science of becoming a learning organization, GM demonstrates organizational ignorance. Saturn, when it actually was a new kind of car company, had the highest J.D. Powers initial quality ratings. Since Saturn was absorbed into the greater GM organization, it has ranked in the lower half of these ratings.

The newest Cadillac, the one General Motors is counting on to revive the Caddy brand and bring it new, younger customers, is going by a monogram rather than a name: CTS.

Despite some troubles, Cadillac is a true success story. The other divisions should imitate it. How is it different? For one, Cadillac has some autonomy. Each GM division needs its own design studio and a dedicated team of engineers to develop new products. They also should be empowered to build distinction into their engines.

A national organization that opposes most regulations aimed at motorists has picked Saturn as its poster child in its fight against cars whose headlights burn when the cars are running.

There hasn't been this much attention on Saturn since the brand launched its first cars in 1990.

As I walked around prototypes of the new Astra three-door hatchback and wagon, these would make for some mighty fine new Saturn products back in the States.

Editorial piece, written more like an opinonated eulogy, posted in the NY Times about Saturn's European-inspired revitalization.