[johnta1]

No one can make me buy what I don't want, but Automakers sure as hell can make me not able to buy what I want, like a new PONTIAC!

Just think if Pontiac was still around they may be doing better than ferd with the NEW Mustang fastest electric vehicle.

From NHRA

6.8x's at 220 MPH with a 5 speed rear wheel drive ELECTRIC car.

[KS circutguy]

How to gay up an CJ/SCJ nameplate.
You watch, these things are going to be nothing but a bunch of oversized remote control cars. The drivers are actually going to be at half-track sitting up in a tower so they can drive the car down the track LOL

[82-T/A]

I'm going to do my best not to get banned, since I think I've had maybe 5 posts in total on here since I joined ... so stop me if I'm going too far.

Pontiac didn't need to die. GM, along with Chrysler, was FORCED into bankruptcy... or "very strongly encouraged" to go into bankruptcy by the administration at the time. They wanted Ford in there too, but Ford politely declined... being still (at least partially) family owned helped save Ford.

There was so much underhanded stuff, I can still remember as if it was yesterday. The UAW was basically bankrupt, and the forced bankruptcy of GM allowed the Federal government to essentially "give" the company to the UAW to help shore them up financially. More than 65% of Chrysler went directly to the UAW, and almost 30% of GM to the UAW as well. The UAW sold Chrysler almost immediately, and took the money to settle their debts... though they had no business getting Chrysler or GM.

In any event... when GM and Chrysler came out of bankruptcy, GM was the primary target of the administration. They obtained "preferred shares," which as you know... you have no control over the company... you're just the first in line as a creditor. Late one Friday night when no one was paying attention, the converted the preferred shares to common stock, and that very same night, they immediately voted out the board of directors of GM. They replaced them all with political donors and union leaders. It's been a long time, but quite literally the only person on the new board that had any experience whatsoever with cars and manufacturing was someone from Thomas or Blue Bird (who make school bus conversions). Everyone else was either a former union leader or political donor. In any case... the "Auto Task Force" was put together (remember that name?) to come up with the future plans for General Motors.

This Auto Task Force envisioned what a GM would look like under the new direction that the administration at the time desired. The focus was entirely on making GM a "green" company... and their premier vehicle was going to be the Volt. Poorly implemented, it failed horribly. But before I get to that... the new board wanted to eliminate anything that even smelled like performance or big engine and horsepower. They cancelled Pontiac, and had even completely cancelled the Corvette program, but every engineer within GM immediately signed a letter to prevent General Motors from cancelling the Corvette. The new board was absolutely furious, but they had to relent... and allowed the Corvette to continue production and design.

Anyway, the Volt failed... no one bought it. To try to rectify this, they came out with Cash for Clunkers. The problem is... no one bought GM cars. They all bought Fords, Toyotas, and Hondas. So they released a Cash for Clunkers 2 (a couple of months later)... and they manipulated the EPA ratings of Ford cars to make them look much worse, because too many people were trading in Chevy cars, and it was destroying the future of the dealers service industry. It still didn't work... and everyone bought Toyotas and Hondas.

We now have a GM where they don't even produce a single car anymore. You have Buick which builds 5 different egg-shaped front wheel drive SUVs of varying size of eggs... each one looks identical to the other. And then you have Chevrolet... where you wouldn't even know you were driving a Chevy if it wasn't for the badge in the front.

Pontiac was a brand that had culture and a following. You knew you were driving a Pontiac because the gauges were illuminated red. Every car, from the ****tiest Canadian Firefly to the Pontiac Montana minivan was available with slightly more performance than you could get elswhere. The Pontiac Montana had the 180hp version of the 3.4 liter, unlike the other cars, and in the Firelfy, you could get a turbo. But all their cars were generally available with dual exhaust, a red illuminated interior, a performance-inspired design, and a split grill. You KNEW you were driving a Pontiac.

Anyway... I'm bitter. I've been buying all new Fords since GM got rid of Pontiac. My last brand new GM vehicle was a 2006 Pontiac Solstice that I special ordered in 2005. I sold it in 2009, and I've never had a new or used GM car since (except classics).

[82-T/A]

Originally Posted by johnta1

No one can make me buy what I don't want, but Automakers sure as hell can make me not able to buy what I want, like a new PONTIAC!

Seriously... Pontiac left us with some really cool cars, even at the very end. Designs are stunted somewhat due to modern NTSHA regulations imposed upon us by the insurance lobby (like the 60/40 rule), but we could still have some very, very cool looking cars. I can only imagine what Pontiac engineers would be building today.

Though, I also wonder if we didn't get ourselves out of some serious disappointment. Would Jimmy Hendrix still be cool today if he kept making music, or would he have become like Metallica where they made a bunch of crappy songs in the late 90s and early 2000s? I'm almost scared to think that GM of today might have created an egg-shaped Pontiac SUV sharing a platform with whatever crap Buick is currently selling.

[KS circutguy]

Gm recently announced that a sedan line is coming back.
Market is telling them people want that option.
SUV's are high-side death traps to me.

[82-T/A]

Originally Posted by KS circutguy

Gm recently announced that a sedan line is coming back.
Market is telling them people want that option.
SUV's are high-side death traps to me.

My wife has a new Bronco that she absolutely loves (2-door), and I have a 2009 Ford Explorer Sport that basically looks like it rolled off the showroom floor... I drive it everywhere, it sits out in the sun, and the paint still looks this good...




But I definitely want a "car." I'll say though, I've filled my stable with so many classic cars now, that I just don't have room for another car. When my daughter graduates, I'll probably get rid of at least 2 or 3 cars (the Corvette, the Solstice, etc.)... and I would consider a car again from GM if it wasn't crap.

Being totally frank, the only thing GM could make that I would even consider... would be a 2-door Buick GS or a Regal... or something like that. If GM made a new rear wheel drive vehicle.... even if it's Turbo-V6 powered... I'd buy that. I just don't think GM has the balls to do that, and likely wouldn't want competition from their own Corvette. But, it would revitalize Buick... which is still mid (as the kids say) to me, when compared to a Pontiac. If they brought back Pontiac, I'd probably buy whatever the hell they offered... just as an emotional purchase. We know that'll never happen...

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by KS circutguy

Gm recently announced that a sedan line is coming back.
Market is telling them people want that option.
SUV's are high-side death traps to me.

I have an SUV and like it. But I also like having a car. A little over a year ago, I wanted to replace was Cadillac CT4 Sport with something with a more rear seat legroom and a larger trunk. My only option with GM was a Cadillac CT5 - which was a larger car than I wanted.

Which is why I now own a BMW 3 series. 2" more legroom than my CT4 and over 6 more cubic feet of trunk room (5 more cubic feet than the CT5). My first non GM car purchase since 80's.

This is a car that is 1.5" shorter than the CT4 and nearly 8" shorter than the CT5.

I gained 18 HP, 37 pd ft of torque while my best fuel mileage increased from 35 in the CT4 to 46 in the BMW (500 mile all highway trip).

GM is supposedly looking to update the CT5, bring back the Camaro and bring a new Buick back in the near future all on the same chassis. The Camaro may be a 4 door (like Chrysler did with the Charger years ago).

I will be interested in seeing what these new vehicles turn out to be. Will GM win me back?

[KS circutguy]

Nice

['ol Pinion head]

Have to disagree with 82-T/A that the Cash for Clunkers program was a result of the "Volt failing". The "Cash for Clunkers' disaster was before the GM Volt was even released.
Another often repeated fallacy, the failure of a program did NOT wipe out legions of classic cars as parts cars. That 2 month long program in the Summer of '09 only allowed qualified vehicles no older than 25 years old & met a certain avg MPG rating.
Believe it was under 18 mpg, vehicles that met the requirements allowed the customer to get either a $3500 or $4500 rebate on a new vehicle. Dealership mechanics then destroyed the engines of these rebate "victims' with a special "cocktail". There is a link
out there that tallies up all the traded in vehicles.... obscene amt of Dodge Caravans (transmission issues very common). TON of late 80's & early 00's Explorers, gobs of 4,3 S10/S15 pickups & MiniBlazers, Vehicles of near every make & model, with many of them in poor mechanical & body condition, Though running! In all just an obscene amt of throw away mid '80's through mid 00's Crusher Bait.

GM's continual slide towards that type of product, is what prompted my Dad, a 36 year GMAC employee to never order another new GM vehicle. HIs last new GM vehicle was an '83 Chevy Silverado short wide. Though very nicely optioned, it wasn't 1/20th of the truck of his prev "78 Silverado short wide.

BTW, In the tally only 552 3rd Gen & 4th Gen Firebirds were crushed. going through the list, one '89 30th anniversary T/A, which
wouldnt surprise any of us if its turbo 231 V6 & 200R4 had been swapped with a lesser performance combo, saw very similar deal here on a rough shape rebuilt title '01 Camaro that gave up its LS1.

[Joog]

Originally Posted by 82-T/A

Seriously... Pontiac left us with some really cool cars, even at the very end. Designs are stunted somewhat due to modern NTSHA regulations imposed upon us by the insurance lobby (like the 60/40 rule), but we could still have some very, very cool looking cars. I can only imagine what Pontiac engineers would be building today.

Though, I also wonder if we didn't get ourselves out of some serious disappointment. Would Jimmy Hendrix still be cool today if he kept making music, or would he have become like Metallica where they made a bunch of crappy songs in the late 90s and early 2000s? I'm almost scared to think that GM of today might have created an egg-shaped Pontiac SUV sharing a platform with whatever crap Buick is currently selling.

I go by that second paragraph, I would think Pontiac would have ended up like Buick, a bunch of crappy crossovers. I think it was better Pontiac stopped when it did so the name couldn't get tarnished.

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by Joog

I go by that second paragraph, I would think Pontiac would have ended up like Buick, a bunch of crappy crossovers. I think it was better Pontiac stopped when it did so the name couldn't get tarnished.

Buick only had 3 models (Enclave, LaCrosse and Lucerne) in 2009 and had total sales of only 102,000 in 2009.

The Buick Enclaves (which is essentially a Chevy Traverse) was there best selling vehicle.

Pontiac sold about 90,000 more vehicles than Buick and had a much broader lineup.

Pontiac had the G3, G5, G6, G8, Montana, Solstice, Torrent and Vibe. The G6 was Pontiac's best seller, easily outselling the Torrent, Pontiac's only crossover.

Pontiac had 2 convertibles - the G6 retractable and the Solstice roadster. They had the G8 with a V8.

Bottom line, Pontiac sold mostly CARS that Pontiac people wanted and the crossover was a mere sideline.

When I bought a 2006 Pontiac Torrent new, it was a second vehicle to go with our Pontiac GP GT. I most likely would have bought a G8 to replace the GP had GM ****canned Buick instead of Pontiac.

[nas t eh]

Buick was outselling Pontiac in China and GM figured they could increase market share in China with Buick but not Pontiac. It was bad logic because large China car sales by GM was a pipe dream, but that is what affected the decision process and Pontiac lost.

Like Champ I switched our sedan purchases over to BMW(s) decades ago and it is difficult to see a way back to American cars at this point. But I do like my GM trucks

[JimFB400HO]

I will be interested to know what the manufacturers and government come up with for the 2027 mandate that all new vehicles have some sort of impairment monitor spying on the driver. The articles about it have had a huge variety of speculation of technology designs. Most if not all appear to be highly intrusive and objectionable. FYI, I find drunk/high/drugged driving despicable but I find such privacy intrusion equally despicable. I have also been interested in the potential 2028 return of GM V8s and sedans but NOT if they will decide how I have approached my car (a GM design), infrared scanning of my eyes, monitoring my heart rate, analyze my sweat, etc. and then shut the car off if the technology is not pleased with what it sees. Oh, and I have to pay for all that garbage.

It's bad enough many cars shut off at stoplights. No, I would not purchase a vehicle that does that either.

[jhein]

Originally Posted by JimFB400HO

I will be interested to know what the manufacturers and government come up with for the 2027 mandate that all new vehicles have some sort of impairment monitor spying on the driver. The articles about it have had a huge variety of speculation of technology designs. Most if not all appear to be highly intrusive and objectionable. FYI, I find drunk/high/drugged driving despicable but I find such privacy intrusion equally despicable. I have also been interested in the potential 2028 return of GM V8s and sedans but NOT if they will decide how I have approached my car (a GM design), infrared scanning of my eyes, monitoring my heart rate, analyze my sweat, etc. and then shut the car off if the technology is not pleased with what it sees. Oh, and I have to pay for all that garbage.

It's bad enough many cars shut off at stoplights. No, I would not purchase a vehicle that does that either.

I agree completely about impaired driving. Not acceptable.

I also agree that monitoring of drivers is an extreme invasion of privacy.

It would be like saying that because spousal abuse and child abuse are horrible things, we're going to place A/V monitors in your home. Not acceptable.

[KS circutguy]

it's bad enough many cars shut off at stoplights. No, I would not purchase a vehicle that does that either.

Didn't they resently put a stop to that?

[KS circutguy]

Originally Posted by The Champ

I have an SUV and like it. But I also like having a car. A little over a year ago, I wanted to replace was Cadillac CT4 Sport with something with a more rear seat legroom and a larger trunk. My only option with GM was a Cadillac CT5 - which was a larger car than I wanted.

.

This is a car that is 1.5" shorter than the CT4 and nearly 8" shorter than the CT5.

I gained 18 HP, 37 pd ft of torque while my best fuel mileage increased from 35 in the CT4 to 46 in the BMW (500 mile all highway trip).

GM is supposedly looking to update the CT5, bring back the Camaro and bring a new Buick back in the near future all on the same chassis. The Camaro may be a 4 door (like Chrysler did with the Charger years ago).

I will be interested in seeing what these new vehicles turn out to be. Will GM win me back[/b]

My daily driver. 1997 328i Sedan with 249,000 miles.

[JimFB400HO]

Originally Posted by jhein

I agree completely about impaired driving. Not acceptable.

I also agree that monitoring of drivers is an extreme invasion of privacy.

It would be like saying that because spousal abuse and child abuse are horrible things, we're going to place A/V monitors in your home. Not acceptable.

Many years ago my wife and I were driving along in our relatively new Pontiac listening to the radio and talking to each other. Suddenly, the radio volume lowers and a voice interrupts our conversation. OnStar was barging into our vehicle telling us something about their service. The next day, I pulled the fuse that powers that intrusive device.

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by nas t eh

Buick was outselling Pontiac in China and GM figured they could increase market share in China with Buick but not Pontiac. It was bad logic because large China car sales by GM was a pipe dream, but that is what affected the decision process and Pontiac lost.

They could have kept a Buick badge on a car for the China market and ****canned Buick in the US.

Who cares what's available in China?

[KS circutguy]

Ferrari is taking a massive risk by entering the electric vehicle market, a move that many purists believe could destroy the brand’s legendary status. With a $640,000 price tag and a design that has sparked intense debate, the "Ferrari Luce" represents a radical shift away from the roar of the V12 engine.
What were they thinking?
https://www.youtube.com/@ValuetainmentShortClips

[Nobuddy]

I suppose if a wanker wants to get onto or move up the waiting list for another Ferrari, Ferrari can require them to buy one of these first. I doubt it will hurt the brand among their actual customers, they may even like them.