Originally posted by: JackBurton
Exactly. The MAIN problem GM has is it still has the Oldsmobile and Buick line! WTF? Why don't they cut those anchors off? Jesus. They can save an ASS load by just getting rid of that crap.Originally posted by: Thera
The "Big 3" suck because they make a car/truck/SUV that I, an American, don't want to purchase. They can try to blame the Unions but in the end the crap models, crap design, crap quality, and crap marketing killed them.
Originally posted by: spidey07
Hence why fanboys should be required to post age and vehicles owned instead of spouting marketing propganda.
Try reading over from the topic title on. There's a BIG part of their problem. As for crap design, if it's so bad, why is it copied by Honda, Nissan and Toyota? If it's marketed so poorly, why is it the top selling vehicle for decades?Originally posted by: Thera
Ah, ok. I somehow thought this thread said they were struggling. Nice to know they're doing good business and taking it to the bank. /end thread.Originally posted by: Ornery
...crap models, crap design, crap quality, and crap marketing killed them...
That's a hoot. Top selling vehicles in this country for the past 20+ years are full size DOMESTIC trucks, copied from the frame up to the RWD, V8s by guess who? :roll:
Until recently no one in the market but the big three made a comparable full size truck.Originally posted by: Ornery
Try reading over from the topic title on. There's a BIG part of their problem. As for crap design, if it's so bad, why is it copied by Honda, Nissan and Toyota? If it's marketed so poorly, why is it the top selling vehicle for decades?Originally posted by: Thera
Ah, ok. I somehow thought this thread said they were struggling. Nice to know they're doing good business and taking it to the bank. /end thread.Originally posted by: Ornery
...crap models, crap design, crap quality, and crap marketing killed them...
That's a hoot. Top selling vehicles in this country for the past 20+ years are full size DOMESTIC trucks, copied from the frame up to the RWD, V8s by guess who? :roll:
Originally posted by: Squisher
Besides all the above reasons and assuming you are talking about the unskilled labor jobs, it still won't work.
Most of you would be surprised by the diversity of auto worker's jobs that are done.
Some can be learned before lunch and some require as much as a year before anyone feels comfortable leaving you on your own.
Try firing someone and having to babysit their replacement for a year.
The 70s gas crunch didn't help out the full sized car market much going into the 80s. I wouldn't wholly blame the production of FWD cars for their problems. That is what the increasing demand was for. The progression of their downfall coinsides also with the growing retired workforce, increase in health costs, increasing union demands and growing competition.Originally posted by: Ornery
It's when they started copying FWD econoboxes that they took a shlt. But, I blame fickle consumers for shifting their preference overnight. Naturally, after Detroit drops almost every RWD, full framed automobile offering, those same fickle consumers decide econoboxes aren't very desirable, so they start buying trucks and SUVs instead. Nitwits... :roll:
Originally posted by: episodic
Originally posted by: DaWhim
because they signed a contract?
I guess I relate everything to 'at will' employment. Why can't you fire anyone you want whenever you want? If I owned a business, and a bunch of people were being lazy and not pulling their weight, I'd fire them. If they became too expensive, I would cut their wages. Why do I have to consult with anyone? If I cut their wage, they can either work or fark off and become someone elses problem. . .
The gas crunch was the entire reason for consumer's overnight change of preference. They may claim they're being "green" today, but that certainly had nothing to do with it then (probably not today either). I blame the lack of experience at building FWDs for the initial problems, and bad reputation that followed. Having all of Detroit building Japanese like econoboxes, is like the tail wagging the dog. The great American boulevard cruiser was the icon of Detroit, unequaled in price/performance/comfort anywhere else in the world. Overnight reduced to building Pintos... :|Originally posted by: SampSon
The 70s gas crunch didn't help out the full sized car market much going into the 80s. I wouldn't wholly blame the production of FWD cars for their problems. That is what the increasing demand was for. The progression of their downfall coinsides also with the growing retired workforce, increase in health costs, increasing union demands and growing competition.
Trucks have always sold, they are a necessary tool.
Originally posted by: Ornery
The gas crunch was the entire reason for consumer's overnight change of preference. They may claim they're being "green" today, but that certainly had nothing to do with it then (probably not today either). I blame the lack of experience at building FWDs for the initial problems, and bad reputation that followed. Having all of Detroit building Japanese like econoboxes, is like the tail wagging the dog. The great American boulevard cruiser was the icon of Detroit, unequaled in price/performance/comfort anywhere else in the world. Overnight reduced to building Pintos... :|Originally posted by: SampSon
The 70s gas crunch didn't help out the full sized car market much going into the 80s. I wouldn't wholly blame the production of FWD cars for their problems. That is what the increasing demand was for. The progression of their downfall coinsides also with the growing retired workforce, increase in health costs, increasing union demands and growing competition.
Trucks have always sold, they are a necessary tool.
All I can say is, thank God for the demand for trucks and SUVs, or Detroit would have perished long ago.
Originally posted by: Ornery
I gave up long ago. Seems like only 20 years ago, I said I'd buy a Japanese car when they built a full size, RWD, V8 cruiser. Not long after, the LS 400 was released... for $40K! Yeah, I'll buy that. :roll: Q45 wasn't much cheaper and repair parts prices were ludicrous. Guess I'll be rebuilding old American iron in the future. Not impossible and well worth the effort!
Originally posted by: Ornery
I'd be happy with just a run of the mill Impala. Sold for about the same relative price as today's Accords, and just as popular for decades.
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: Ornery
I'd be happy with just a run of the mill Impala. Sold for about the same relative price as today's Accords, and just as popular for decades.
Ok...you are just not getting it.
Not many have $10k+ to drop on a car.
Most are looking at monthly payments and no problems...hence Accords.
No, you're not getting it. I'm wishing Detroit still built a car like the old Impala. Full frame, RWD, with a V8 or even straight six if you wanted, not to mention 2dr and 4dr versions, all for the equivalent of the same cheap price as today's Accords, Corollas and Altimas. But, you can't blame them for dropping that platform when all the consumers flocked to econoboxes. Trucks and SUVs now fill that niche, which is a sorry alternative.Originally posted by: alkemyst
Ok...you are just not getting it.
Not many have $10k+ to drop on a car.
Most are looking at monthly payments and no problems...hence Accords.
Originally posted by: Ornery
No, you're not getting it. I'm wishing Detroit still built a car like the old Impala. Full frame, RWD, with a V8 or even straight six if you wanted, not to mention 2dr and 4dr versions, all for the equivalent of the same cheap price as today's Accords, Corollas and Altimas. But, you can't blame them for dropping that platform when all the consumers flocked to econoboxes. Trucks and SUVs now fill that niche, which is a sorry alternative.
Originally posted by: Ornery
What is wrong with the GTO and that type of car for the Impala needs?
Man, you REALLY don't get it. The Impala was a simple family car from its introduction in 1958. It was the best selling car in the country over the following decade. It could be purchased as an economy 6 cylinder, SS version 8 cylinder, and everything in between including a wagon. It was inexpensive to buy new, cheap and easy to work on, and could be the same today.
A body on frame is FAR more durable and rugged than a unibody, which is why even Toyota, Honda and Nissan use that platform for their trucks. The elbow and legroom in that car, with the deep benches that could seat six belted adults, are sorely missed. The trunk space was phenomenal, and there was plenty of room in the engine bay. If Detroit would offer vehicles of that configuration again, for the same comparably cheap prices and option availability, they'd be back in the black quicker than you can say Magnum!
Originally posted by: alkemyst
No I do GET IT. You don't understand the culture today though.
People buying NEW cars want luxury...they may actually have a '6x impala in the driveway too.
Everything available in a 2008 Corolla, could be offered in a 2008 resurrected/retro, RWD, V8 propelled Impala.
Rugged = fuxored driver and car. If you have ever been in an accident with a reinforced car you will know this.
:roll: WTF are you talking about?
However, face it for the same comparably cheap prices and option availability ain't going to happen.
It's exactly what should happen to give consumers a choice between Japanese econoboxes, overpriced European and good old, fair priced, American cruisers. It would be just the thing to help get more trucks, minivans & SUVs off the road as well!
bring more money to the table.
YOU don't understand the culture today!