GM in Talks to buy Chrysler

[flopticalcube]

Just saw this on RoBTV. No details yet.

[d_and_n5000]

Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSN1434291920070214) says that GM and Chrysler aren't telling us if they are. Might be interesting, though. I don't think that it would happen, but I didn't think Apple would go Intel, either, and look where we are now.

[yg17]

Not quite....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17184561/

The last thing we need are more oversized, gas guzzling, unreliable SUVs.....

[flopticalcube]

I don't understand it either but there you go. Suicide for both GM and Chrysler, imho.

[flopticalcube]

Not quite....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17184561/

The last thing we need are more oversized, gas guzzling, unreliable SUVs.....

No, this is a new report above and beyond the SUV alliance.

Here's a link to the Reuters report:

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlebusiness.aspx?type=businessNews&storyID=2007-02-16T164115Z_01_N16201834_RTRUKOC_0_UK-CHRYSLERGROUP-GM.xml

General Motors (GM.N: Quote, Profile , Research) is in talks to buy the Chrysler Group in its entirety,

[drlunanerd]

Good riddance. DaimlerChrysler has been a near disaster for Mercedes Benz.

[PlaceofDis]

Good riddance. DaimlerChrysler has been a near disaster for Mercedes Benz.

it has, but i doubt that GM having them will do much good either.
personally i think this would only hurt GM. they're spread too thin in their various 'child' companies as it is, and this wouldn't help. unless they finally axe some of their own lines to make room the Jeep/Dodge/MB/Chrystler.

[bousozoku]

Generic Motors have deserved to die for a long time. Their executives don't care about cars more than extracting the most profit from them.

I'd hate to see Chrysler go because they actually arrive at some good ideas. Of course, not balancing their vehicle lineup for high fuel prices was not one of their good ideas.

Daimler Benz hasn't made things better. They try to run the company by replacing people who might actually understand it and those people have no idea about volume sales, having been part of a luxury marque.

[TequilaBoobs]

chrysler's cars have gotten better with the old mercedes parts bin. if GM were to run chrysler, another restructuring would likely occur, and who knows what that will result in.

i thought chrysler was doing well with their 300, crossfire, and their newly released sebring. guess not.

[Thanatoast]

Yeah, there's gonna have to be some thinning of the herd, from Daimler *and* GM. I always knew Chrysler would be a drag on Mercedes. I hope Jeep doesn't go the way of the dodo, though.

[takao]

1 year ago voices were already strong at mercedes to sell it and the last 2-3 days when you watched german media it only got worse... while mercedes got from mild problems in 2005 into reaping huge profits chrysler sales are suffering more and more despite increase efficiency ... the problem with chrysler is that they only sell 10% of their cars on the international market and thus can't buffer of a bad year/bad model etc.

also in terms of using plattforms mercedes gains like zero from chrysler
so far technology only went from mercedes to chrysler (E-class -> 300, SLK -> crossfire) and rather little back

[bousozoku]

chrysler's cars have gotten better with the old mercedes parts bin. if GM were to run chrysler, another restructuring would likely occur, and who knows what that will result in.

i thought chrysler was doing well with their 300, crossfire, and their newly released sebring. guess not.

I think the problem is that the 300, Crossfire, and the Hemi trucks were selling too well and the Calibre was not. Now that the price of fuel is higher, those which were selling well are not and the Calibre still is not selling well to pick up the slack.

Chrysler would be better off with VW than with GM.

[IJ Reilly]

News Flash: GM to Throw a Concrete Life Preserver to Struggling Chrysler

[TheDance511]

um i HATE GM as they have no character...i liek chrysler and idont liek ford.. i liek german cars....but if chrysler and gm merge they will not see a dime of MY money.... i hope people feel teh same way too

[quagmire]

Not quite....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17184561/

The last thing we need are more oversized, gas guzzling, unreliable SUVs.....

While SUV's are oversized and gas guzzling, I wouldn't call GM's full size SUV and trucks unreliable.

Anyway, DCX has the power to fix Chrysler. Proof is the Charger, 300C, etc. The main problem is fighting between Mercedes and Chrysler. Chrysler seems to welcome help from Mercedes, but Mercedes doesn't want anything to do with Chrysler. I as well don't support this. Too much overlap with existing GM products and brands. Only brand that might be worth while is Jeep and only products worthwhile is the Viper which would be reskinned as a Pontiac and the Cummins Diesel, although the Duramax is a good diesel as well. This would also hinder GM's turnaround plan which seems to be working so far. I bet this is a ploy to get the UAW to concede some things when Chrysler goes into its contract talks with the UAW later this year.

[dpaanlka]

um i HATE GM as they have no character...i liek chrysler and idont liek ford.. i liek german cars....but if chrysler and gm merge they will not see a dime of MY money.... i hope people feel teh same way too

Most of the auto media sure doesn't. Obviously you haven't driven a new GM.

[quagmire]

Most of the auto media sure doesn't. Obviously you haven't driven a new GM.

I bet he is Farago. Who only likes German cars and drives a Porsche while there is his smug cloud over him and claims to know about cars. Just go to thetruthaboutcars.com and see the crap they write out. Farago is trying to get famous with his GM Deathwatch articles.

PS: Oh look, he started a Chrysler Suicide watch.

[drlunanerd]

Chrysler would be better off with VW than with GM.

Over my dead body! ;)

[dpaanlka]

I bet he is Farago. Who only likes German cars and drives a Porsche while there is his smug cloud over him and claims to know about cars. Just go to thetruthaboutcars.com and see the crap they write out. Farago is trying to get famous with his GM Deathwatch articles.

PS: Oh look, he started a Chrysler Suicide watch.

Its funny because GM is set to be the first American-based manufacturer to post a profit again this year.

[bousozoku]

Its funny because GM is set to be the first American-based manufacturer to post a profit again this year.

Now, if they could do that by making good cars all round, that would be a point to make. Making cheap cars expensive is definitely a good way to make money. It's just not a good way to make good cars.

[dpaanlka]

Now, if they could do that by making good cars all round, that would be a point to make. Making cheap cars expensive is definitely a good way to make money. It's just not a good way to make good cars.

Their new efforts are hardly cheap. The Saturn Aura, Saturn Sky, Buick Lucerne, the new CTS and Malibu coming this year, the new Impalas. Their V8s and now V6s that shut off cylinders to save gas. I'm sure none of you anti-GM people have ever seen, sat in, or heard of any of this, because all you want to think of is Olds Achievas and Park Avenues from the 90s. They're in the middle of a process of replacing essentially every car they make with something completely new. They already have publicly said many times they realized they made massive errors in the last two decades, especially in cheapness.

Bob Lutz makes references to it all the time.

[iGav]

personally i think this would only hurt GM. they're spread too thin in their various 'child' companies as it is, and this wouldn't help.

Seem's like it doesn't it. Ford have done the same, and Volkswagon are seemingly in the process of travelling down that road too.

[Zwhaler]

Good riddance. DaimlerChrysler has been a near disaster for Mercedes Benz.

I know! What a horrible decision for Mercedes Benz. As soon as they combined, they released that ugly minivan! What is that? And now their SUV's are becoming more and more chrystler-like. I am afraid to buy a Mercedes because it feels like I am buying a chrystler. (At least in the SUV region)

[bousozoku]

Their new efforts are hardly cheap. The Saturn Aura, Saturn Sky, Buick Lucerne, the new CTS and Malibu coming this year, the new Impalas. Their V8s and now V6s that shut off cylinders to save gas. I'm sure none of you anti-GM people have ever seen, sat in, or heard of any of this, because all you want to think of is Olds Achievas and Park Avenues from the 90s. They're in the middle of a process of replacing essentially every car they make with something completely new. They already have publicly said many times they realized they made massive errors in the last two decades, especially in cheapness.

Bob Lutz makes references to it all the time.

Cadillac had the V8-6-4 years ago back around 1980. It didn't do much for fuel economy.

Then, something must have changed in one year because they were still cheap at the 2005 car show. GM still doesn't decent seats or switchgear. They're too concerned about impressing people with sheet metal, still, after all these years. The Impala did look nice, but this latest revision makes it look cheap. Chevrolet in particular, will always embrace cheap, because their customers are happy with that.

I sat in a Buick SUV last year because the representative didn't have anyone else in the area to capture. He wanted to impress me with how quiet it was. It was almost as quiet as my 1999 VW Golf. When I asked him about how often the engines suffered a total breakdown, my mum's friend having experienced this miles from nowhere, he became upset and walked away.

In fact, it was the same with all of the GM vehicles. They've changed--it's like they've finally embraced the 1980s.

[Zwhaler]

I agree that GM and Chrystler are cheap. Havn't I argued about this before?

[bousozoku]

I agree that GM and Chrysler are cheap. Havn't I argued about this before?

Even my parents' 1998 Plymouth minivan doesn't seem as cheap as most Chevrolet models and it was bottom of the line. It has decent road manners and reasonable seats, which would be an improvement for many GM models.

[Dont Hurt Me]

One thing thats allways bothered me about GM the past 20 years is the lack of styling, why must all GM cars be bland? And if they are lucky enough to have any styling GM wants 25-30K for them. Meanwhile over at Toyota the $12,000 Yaris has more styling then anything with a GM badge.

GM & Chrysler need to see why Honda & Toyota arent loosing billions? American short term profits management is the whole problem. These guys still havent figured out how to make a economical car nor want to. Gas is going back to $3 a gallon watch and see and GM/Chrysler/Ford have near nothing. My next car I think is going to be Toyota and I will be rooting for the Toyota's at Nascar:) Go Michael!

[Bibulous]

Heard talk this afternoon that GM will make an offer tomorrow, something about needing to maintain market share and it fits with their move to flexible plants (build any car at any plant).

Not good news for anyone who works in the industry :(

[dpaanlka]

This thread is actually really amusing now. A lot of you clearly don't know much about cars.

[ErikCLDR]

I am surprised GM is making offers.

I would think Hyundai would be very interested in picking up chrysler. They are extremely successful and are growing. "Hyundai is the new Honda". Picking up all those dealerships would be a pretty good deal for them.

[bousozoku]

This thread is actually really amusing now. A lot of you clearly don't know much about cars.

It's just that we're not wearing your rose-coloured GM glasses.

[dpaanlka]

It's just that we're not wearing your rose-coloured GM glasses.

No, just rose-coloured 3D glasses with built in speakers at a Toyota IMAX theater presentation.

But seriously, the some of the anti-GM stuff in here just sounds too ridiculous to actually be reasonable. GM has nothing as stylish as a Toyota Yaris? Come on now.

[quagmire]

But seriously, the some of the anti-GM stuff in here just sounds too ridiculous to actually be reasonable. GM has nothing as stylish as a Toyota Yaris? Come on now.

Styling is subjective. IMHO, if you think the Camry is stylish then the Aztek was a styling marvel. The Camry's and Accord( although I do like the Accord Coupe concept that was at NAIAS) are one of the blandest vehicles on the road today. The new Camry has more style, but they just ripped off Mazda for the front end styling. The RAV4-XL, my bad the new Highlander is ugly, IMHO. Although I wouldn't mind a Supra if it returned.

[Thomas Veil]

No, just rose-coloured 3D glasses with built in speakers at a Toyota IMAX theater presentation.

But seriously, the some of the anti-GM stuff in here just sounds too ridiculous to actually be reasonable. GM has nothing as stylish as a Toyota Yaris? Come on now.No, I agree with them. GM has nothing as badly-styled as the Yaris. ;)

You're right, though. Japanese cars are not exactly known for styling. In the history of mankind, nobody has ever said the words, "Wow, look at that totally hot Camry!!"

But I also have to agree the Chrysler/Mercedes thing was a disaster from the git-go, starting with the supposed "equal partnership" that turned sour when it was clear to the Chrysler group that they'd been lied to about that. Then too, Chrysler has been working hard to increase its reliability, and Mercedes has been going the opposite direction in that category. Even when Mercedes tried to imitate those old Lee Iacocca commercials with their "Ask Dr. Z" spots...man, they were atrocious!

I think the only good thing that came out of the marriage was that some of Chrysler's styling rubbed off on the stodgier M-B models. Aside from that, I'll be glad to see them split.

Chrysler could do a lot worse than going with GM. I just hope that the company won't be subsumed into the GM brand line.

[ErikCLDR]

No, I agree with them. GM has nothing as badly-styled as the Yaris. ;)

You're right, though. Japanese cars are not exactly known for styling. In the history of mankind, nobody has ever said the words, "Wow, look at that totally hot Camry!!"

But I also have to agree the Chrysler/Mercedes thing was a disaster from the git-go, starting with the supposed "equal partnership" that turned sour when it was clear to the Chrysler group that they'd been lied to about that. Then too, Chrysler has been working hard to increase its reliability, and Mercedes has been going the opposite direction in that category. Even when Mercedes tried to imitate those old Lee Iacocca commercials with their "Ask Dr. Z" spots...man, they were atrocious!

I think the only good thing that came out of the marriage was that some of Chrysler's styling rubbed off on the stodgier M-B models. Aside from that, I'll be glad to see them split.

Chrysler could do a lot worse than going with GM. I just hope that the company won't be subsumed into the GM brand line.


I agree. I can't wait to see a chrysler, dodge, and jeep version of the trail blazer/envoy/bravada/9-7x/Renier (sp?) and all the other branded versions of thouse.

[Bibulous]

Chrysler could do a lot worse than going with GM. I just hope that the company won't be subsumed into the GM brand line.

For anyone who works for Chrysler (and a good deal of GM), short of closing up shop it could not be worse. If GM gets the deal it's looking for, it's going to be bad, real bad in the short term for White and Blue collar workers.

Maybe there will be an employee buyout? One can only hope.

[bousozoku]

Styling is subjective. IMHO, if you think the Camry is stylish then the Aztek was a styling marvel. The Camry's and Accord( although I do like the Accord Coupe concept that was at NAIAS) are one of the blandest vehicles on the road today. The new Camry has more style, but they just ripped off Mazda for the front end styling. The RAV4-XL, my bad the new Highlander is ugly, IMHO. Although I wouldn't mind a Supra if it returned.

The Aztek was a styling marvel and I'm sure that it's been used in classes as the highest example of what not to do. Even Buick's version didn't fix it 100 %.

I thought the Pontiac Vibe had better than average sheetmetal but the interior was such junk that I wouldn't even consider it. For some reason, I still believe that you shouldn't be aware of each part in the seat's construction when you're sitting on it.

Japanese styling goes in waves. Nissan had their go with curves and the cars sold well in the U.S.A. but they bombed in Japan, so things were changed. Mazda has more luck because they're a much smaller company. Honda's Acura TL could have been designed by Alfa Romeo but mostly, their cars are inoffensive and that's the nicest thing I can say.

[geese]

On a slightly OT note- does anyone know how GM's european launch of Cadillac has gone? They released the SAAB based BLS (http://www.whatcar.co.uk/car-review-summary.aspx?NEW_USED=1&MA_TYPE=1&MA=51&RT=778&Submit1=GO) a little while ago, yet i've not seen them about in the UK. Maybe they did better on the continent.

GM would be wise to follow Fords lead in Europe and invest in its premium brands. Look what Ford made with Volvo, Land Rover and Aston Martin. Cars that provide a serious alternative to the usual german buys. What have GM got in Europe? Cash-starved SAAB, the Cadillac BLS, and the Vauxhall/Opel Signum.

[iGav]

GM would be wise to follow Fords lead in Europe and invest in its premium brands. Look what Ford made with Volvo, Land Rover and Aston Martin. Cars that provide a serious alternative to the usual german buys.

I'm not sure on the Volvo front, they were a considered a more premium brand before Ford took over, but I'd certainly agree on Land Rover and especially Aston Martin, though the latter really has less to do with Ford as such, and more the visionary Dr. Bez.

Better not mention Jaguar though... that's a real thorn in Ford side.

I still think Ford (the parent company) needs to consider spinning off Ford Europe as it's own company, otherwise... I can see them both going down.

[takao]

On a slightly OT note- does anyone know how GM's european launch of Cadillac has gone? They released the SAAB based BLS (http://www.whatcar.co.uk/car-review-summary.aspx?NEW_USED=1&MA_TYPE=1&MA=51&RT=778&Submit1=GO) a little while ago, yet i've not seen them about in the UK. Maybe they did better on the continent.

haven't seen one so far

GM would be wise to follow Fords lead in Europe and invest in its premium brands. Look what Ford made with Volvo, Land Rover and Aston Martin. Cars that provide a serious alternative to the usual german buys. What have GM got in Europe? Cash-starved SAAB, the Cadillac BLS, and the Vauxhall/Opel Signum.

problem is that at least around here the germans are so dominant that going straight at them won't work.. it doesn't help that GM completely ruined the Opel brand 15-5 years ago with bland rebadged designs etc. which ruined the the reputation ... now opel has good designed cars with good quality but they simply don't sell as they did in the past (Opel is actually one of the oldest german brands)
a new premium car isn't going to cut it ... the problem is in the Golf and 3/C-class category not in the 7/E+ category...

[geese]

I'm not sure on the Volvo front, they were a considered a more premium brand before Ford took over, but I'd certainly agree on Land Rover and especially Aston Martin, though the latter really has less to do with Ford as such, and more the visionary Dr. Bez.

Better not mention Jaguar though... that's a real thorn in Ford side.

I still think Ford (the parent company) needs to consider spinning off Ford Europe as it's own company, otherwise... I can see them both going down.

Volvo are making desirable cars very profitably now, whereas before they were making boring cars reasonably profitably. Ford has had a positive influence on the desirablility of Volvo i think, much like they did with Land Rover.

As for Jaguar - at least Ford managed to improve the quality and the desirabliity of the cars. Wait until the next generation of saloons- more interesting designs will hopefully inch them towards the black.

I think Ford Europe should stage a coup of the US arm. I cant see Ford US spinning them off just so it can die quietly in a corner.

haven't seen one so far

a new premium car isn't going to cut it ... the problem is in the Golf and 3/C-class category not in the 7/E+ category...

A premium car will help though - and they have the brand, SAAB, but their 3/c-class competitor, looks nice but 9-3 (http://www.whatcar.co.uk/car-review-full.aspx?RT=458) is ludicrously based upon the Vectra platform! Audi might be able to get away with their Golf/Passat based cars, but not SAAB on a plodding Vectra!

I'm not sure on the Volvo front, they were a considered a more premium brand before Ford took over, but I'd certainly agree on Land Rover and especially Aston Martin, though the latter really has less to do with Ford as such, and more the visionary Dr. Bez.

Better not mention Jaguar though... that's a real thorn in Ford side.

I still think Ford (the parent company) needs to consider spinning off Ford Europe as it's own company, otherwise... I can see them both going down.

Volvo are making desirable cars very profitably now, whereas before they were making boring cars reasonably profitably. Ford has had a positive influence on the desirablility of Volvo i think, much like they did with Land Rover.

As for Jaguar - at least Ford managed to improve the quality and the desirabliity of the cars. Wait until the next generation of saloons- more interesting designs will hopefully inch them towards the black.

I think Ford Europe should stage a coup of the US arm. I cant see Ford US spinning them off just so it can die quietly in a corner.

[takao]

A premium car will help though - and they have the brand, SAAB, but their 3/c-class competitor, looks nice but 9-3 (http://www.whatcar.co.uk/car-review-full.aspx?RT=458) is ludicrously based upon the Vectra platform! Audi might be able to get away with their Golf/Passat based cars, but not SAAB on a plodding Vectra!

the brand "Saab" isn't though quite as strong as 15 or 20 years ago .. actually i would consider the brand more on the "dead" side... even volvo has problems with sales and brand because they can't differentiate enough from ford
the new hatchback is a step in the right direction but it will not have enough of an impact in the market

the old saab = performance, volvo = safety is lost with other companies being stronger and stronger in those departments
there is a reason why Volvo Group sold their car business to ford and kept their Truck business which is still highly profitable with market leading products

[Thomas Veil]

For anyone who works for Chrysler (and a good deal of GM), short of closing up shop it could not be worse. If GM gets the deal it's looking for, it's going to be bad, real bad in the short term for White and Blue collar workers.

Maybe there will be an employee buyout? One can only hope.Boy, I won't argue with you there! I was looking at it from a consumer standpoint, but yeah, it'll suck for the workers...and it'll start with the inevitable "removal of redundancies" that happens when two companies merge.

[geese]

the brand "Saab" isn't though quite as strong as 15 or 20 years ago .. actually i would consider the brand more on the "dead" side... even volvo has problems with sales and brand because they can't differentiate enough from ford
the new hatchback is a step in the right direction but it will not have enough of an impact in the market


SAAB a dead brand? Are you sure? If VW could reverse Skoda's image problems to the extent that its affecting VWs sales, I'm sure Saab could do the same.

SAAB can still be a premium brand if they made premium cars- they still can if only GM would invest in them!

Its not like MG Rover, whose livelyhood relied on the 10 year old 25 and 45 models. That trully was and is a dead brand.

[IJ Reilly]

Chrysler could do a lot worse than going with GM. I just hope that the company won't be subsumed into the GM brand line.

Unfortunately, this seems entirely likely. Look at what happened to Saturn. GM's management has an amazing talent for turning silk purses into sow's ears.

[geese]

Unfortunately, this seems entirely likely. Look at what happened to Saturn. GM's management has an amazing talent for turning silk purses into sow's ears.

I've been to north america twice and I was quite curious about them Saturn cars- they seemed to be very different to alot of the wobbly designed cars on the road.

Whats so unique/different about them? Was it GMs attempt to be more like Honda or VW? How did they mess it up?

[IJ Reilly]

I've been to north america twice and I was quite curious about them Saturn cars- they seemed to be very different to alot of the wobbly designed cars on the road.

Whats so unique/different about them? Was it GMs attempt to be more like Honda or VW? How did they mess it up?

Saturn was created during the 1980s as a completely independent division of GM, with its own designers creating a unique platform and going their own way with styling. The company had finally recognized that they needed to wipe the slate clean. The gamble worked. The cars were an immediate hit -- they did not look like GM cars and were better built. The company developed a real following among American car buyers, and it began to look like GM had come up with a real answer to Honda and Toyota. After a few years of this (embarrassed by the success, I guess), GM's management decided that Saturn was too independent. Now, Saturn is just another division of GM, and their cars are based on the same GM platform as Pontiac, Chevrolet, Buick and Cadillac.

[geese]

After a few years of this (embarrassed by the success, I guess), GM's management decided that Saturn was too independent. Now, Saturn is just another division of GM, and their cars are based on the same GM platform as Pontiac, Chevrolet, Buick and Cadillac.

Interesting. GM never heard of the expression "if it isnt broke, dont fix it". I didnt realise they were independant of GM, design wise. Now they're rebadging the competent yet-not-particularly-remarkable Vauxhall Astra.

[IJ Reilly]

Interesting. GM never heard of the expression "if it isnt broke, dont fix it". I didnt realise they were independant of GM, design wise. Now they're rebadging the competent yet-not-particularly-remarkable Vauxhall Astra.

Right. I think GM's management for this and other reasons is the very picture of incompetence, and why I cringe at the idea of them acquiring Chrysler. For better and worse, Chrysler makes unique cars. A few of them at least have been very good. If Chrysler becomes a division of GM, the brand will almost certainly be smothered by GM's top-heavy management style.

[quagmire]

Saturn was created during the 1980s as a completely independent division of GM, with its own designers creating a unique platform and going their own way with styling. The company had finally recognized that they needed to wipe the slate clean. The gamble worked. The cars were an immediate hit -- they did not look like GM cars and were better built. The company developed a real following among American car buyers, and it began to look like GM had come up with a real answer to Honda and Toyota. After a few years of this (embarrassed by the success, I guess), GM's management decided that Saturn was too independent. Now, Saturn is just another division of GM, and their cars are based on the same GM platform as Pontiac, Chevrolet, Buick and Cadillac.

Not quite. Saturn was starved of product. Mostly due to the people at Chevy bitching about how Saturn is stealing their R&D money. They were still independent up till a few years ago. Now with products like the Sky, Aura, the Astra( think of what you want of it geese, but the Astra has sold pretty well in Europe) Saturn can hopefully regain some customers. Now the Aura is pretty much a reskinned G6 then it is Vectra. The new Vue is more Opelized with taking the similar interior to the Opel Antara. The Astra is a 100% Opel with a Saturn badge. I said it in another thread and I will say it again, there is nothing wrong with rebadging vehicles that aren't sold in the US already. It is called using your global assets in the now global industry. Saturn and Opel will be inter changeable by 2015 I think GM said. The Corsa will be coming over in the next generation. You see Toyota and Honda do the same thing. Some of the Scions are from Japan. The Fit was on sale in Japan since 2001 I think.

PS: The Vibe is pretty much a Matrix. Don't knock the Vibe and let the Matrix get away with a get away from bashing card.

PSS: Cadillac in Europe has been a failure. Escalade is big and no diesel is offered. The BLS is just a rebadged 9-3. The new CTS will be offered with a diesel so that might help. Chevy though has been gaining traction in Europe.

PSSS: Well job lay offs are what happens when a company shrinks. You shouldn't bash the company for it because they can't support them anymore. Anyway, most of them are still in the Job Bank getting paid full wages while sitting there butt on a couch.

[IJ Reilly]

Not quite. Saturn was starved of product. Mostly due to the people at Chevy bitching about how Saturn is stealing their R&D money.

IOW, what I said. :rolleyes:

[Counterfit]

One thing thats allways bothered me about GM the past 20 years is the lack of styling, why must all GM cars be bland? And if they are lucky enough to have any styling GM wants 25-30K for them. Meanwhile over at Toyota the $12,000 Yaris has more styling then anything with a GM badge.

Lack of styling? Let's go back 20 years. 1987 models: Camry (http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&hl=en&safe=off&c2coff=1&q=1987+TOYOTA+CAMRY&btnG=Search), Maxima (http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&hl=en&safe=off&c2coff=1&q=1987+Nissan+Maxima&btnG=Search), Accord (http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&hl=en&safe=off&c2coff=1&q=1987+honda+accord&btnG=Search). Real stylish. :rolleyes:
Actually, out of those models in the years since, the 2001-03 Maxima is the only one that looked good, and not bland. Of course, Nissan had to go and **** it up completely.

You're right, though. Japanese cars are not exactly known for styling. In the history of mankind, nobody has ever said the words, "Wow, look at that totally hot Camry!!"

Personally, I think the 1996-current Subaru Legacy sedan/wagon (the basis for the Outback) has been one of the best looking cars in that time period.

[ErikCLDR]

I think the worst styling of any car company comes from dodge/chrysler.

:D

I'm not kidding.

What the h*** is this? Huge station wagons were dead 15 years ago.
http://www.automedia.com/NewCarBuyersGuide/photos/2005/Dodge/Magnum/SUV/2005_Dodge_Magnum_ext_1.jpg

[bousozoku]

I think the worst styling of any car company comes from dodge/chrysler.

:D

I'm not kidding.

What the h*** is this? Huge station wagons were dead 15 years ago.
http://www.automedia.com/NewCarBuyersGuide/photos/2005/Dodge/Magnum/SUV/2005_Dodge_Magnum_ext_1.jpg

It's appropriate for what it is. It's not just a station wagon, but it's a performance car that has roots in the 1960s and 1970s with various Chrsyler cars with hemi engines.

[takao]

Chevy though has been gaining traction in Europe.


by selling Daewoo cars, which no matter from what side you look at, are hardly exciting
perhaps the most stupid way to ruin a name ...

[Counterfit]

I think the worst styling of any car company comes from dodge/chrysler.
*points at the current Maxima, any Camry (bland or just plain ugly), MR2 Spider, new CR-V, or any Toyota (again, either bland or ugly, aside from the Supra and 2000GT)*

What the h*** is this? Huge station wagons were dead 15 years ago.
http://www.automedia.com/NewCarBuyersGuide/photos/2005/Dodge/Magnum/SUV/2005_Dodge_Magnum_ext_1.jpg

The Magnum isn't a huge station wagon. This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:91-96_Chevrolet_Caprice_wagon.jpg) is a huge station wagon.
Besides, wagons are coming back. People are starting to realize they don't need an Excursion to get groceries once a week.

[bousozoku]

by selling Daewoo cars, which no matter from what side you look at, are hardly exciting
perhaps the most stupid way to ruin a name ...

Does it ruin Daewoo's name or Chevrolet's?

They're being sold as Suzuki here but the information panel in the door jamb clearly shows it as a Daewoo product.

[ErikCLDR]

*points at the current Maxima, any Camry (bland or just plain ugly), MR2 Spider, new CR-V, or any Toyota (again, either bland or ugly, aside from the Supra and 2000GT)*



The Magnum isn't a huge station wagon. This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:91-96_Chevrolet_Caprice_wagon.jpg) is a huge station wagon.
Besides, wagons are coming back. People are starting to realize they don't need an Excursion to get groceries once a week.

I'm not saying a hatchback is a bad thing. But a full fledged fugly station wagon is disgusting. Currently I think chrysler has some of the ugliest cars around.
-----
Yes the magnum doesn't offer wood grain panelling, but its only a matter of time, as we saw with the PT Cruiser "woody" edition.
http://artscars.tripod.com/pt2.jpg

[IJ Reilly]

I'm not saying a hatchback is a bad thing. But a full fledged fugly station wagon is disgusting.

Well then definitely -- if you don't like them, then nobody ought to have one.

[aloofman]

PS: The Vibe is pretty much a Matrix. Don't knock the Vibe and let the Matrix get away with a get away from bashing card.


I believe he said he didn't like the Vibe's interior. The interior is one of the things that's different between the Vibe and Matrix, so in this case, he CAN bash one without the other.

Although, having been in both cars, I can attest that it's pretty subjective. Just depends on which style you like better.

[ITASOR]

I sure hope Chrystler is sold...right now they're making Jeeps that aren't Jeeps, and half their cars have half windows that and look like something crushed the roof in.

[bousozoku]

I sure hope Chrystler is sold...right now they're making Jeeps that aren't Jeeps, and half their cars have half windows that and look like something crushed the roof in.

Some people like the chopped top look and spend lots of money to modify cars from the 1950s. Other people want the same thing in modern cars. The Prowler, PT Cruiser, and Magnum all give people like that cars they find interesting.

You're sounding like those people who still use Mac OS 9 because Mac OS X isn't really an Apple product. ;)

[ErikCLDR]

I sure hope Chrystler is sold...right now they're making Jeeps that aren't Jeeps, and half their cars have half windows that and look like something crushed the roof in.

I 2nd that.

10 Years ago every other SUV you saw was a new jeep. Now the japanese and luxury brands have taken over. Jeep is going downhill and they need to get back up to speed. With the new jeeps (2005+), their interiors aren't great, ergonomically and logically speaking they are poorly designed, and they are debatably ugly. IMO, they're not bad looking, its just that parts of the car don't match. Like the front of the grand cherokee is all rounded and such, but the rest is all boxy. The commander is boxy all around but somehow the grill and headlights do not look good with the rest of it. Same with the compass, the whole thing is fine, but the front looks like something off a toy.

[IJ Reilly]

The Jeep has been a substandard car for decades, in virtually every respect. Of all of Chrysler's products, I think the Jeep has always been the all-around worst. I'm not sure I understand what keeps this brand alive.

[aloofman]

The Jeep has been a substandard car for decades, in virtually every respect. Of all of Chrysler's products, I think the Jeep has always been the all-around worst. I'm not sure I understand what keeps this brand alive.


I could understand it more 15 years ago, when Jeep was really the only outdoorsy utility vehicle brand out there. But these days only a rabid Jeep fan can't admit that they're no longer leading that category in any way. It's like Jeep has become Chrysler's SUV brand, except that all of DC's other divisions have SUVs too.

Then again, Land Rover is pretty much the same story, except that they've conned people into paying tens of thousands of dollars more for them. Maybe Jeep needs to hire some of their marketing people.

[ErikCLDR]

The Jeep has been a substandard car for decades, in virtually every respect. Of all of Chrysler's products, I think the Jeep has always been the all-around worst. I'm not sure I understand what keeps this brand alive.

Well, up until recently the grand cherokee definitely kept jeep alive. I don't know where you live, but you see tons of the grand cherokees made between 1993 and 2004. Maybe its just here, I dunno :confused:. At least 5 students at my school have a grand cherokee. There are also a few wranglers, and a couple liberties and normal cherokees. The wranglers for years have been very popular.

The Grand Cherokee interior and overall build quality was pretty good for the 1993-1998 models. I would rate the 1999-2004 models to have an interior better than a tahoe and better than an explorer. The 4.0L AMC I6 although solid, is undoubtedly a soild,excellent engine. Where the problem lied with jeep was with their crappy chrysler transmissions and A/C systems. Talk to any owner of a chrysler product from back then and see what issues they've had.

This brand is alive because people buy their cars, and I don't expect they'll be going anywhere anytime soon. The name is huge too.

I really hope GM doesn't buy chrysler, I think a Jeep Grand Cherokee will eventually become a Tahoe. If someone like Hyundai bought jeep, hopefully with their new age thinking of quality, reliability, high accommodations, and low cost all rolled into one, will help improve Jeep. Additionally, Hyundai's engineers have a very good ability to mimic other, higher end cars, making their low end models stylish.

[ErikCLDR]

I could understand it more 15 years ago, when Jeep was really the only outdoorsy utility vehicle brand out there. But these days only a rabid Jeep fan can't admit that they're no longer leading that category in any way. It's like Jeep has become Chrysler's SUV brand, except that all of DC's other divisions have SUVs too.

Then again, Land Rover is pretty much the same story, except that they've conned people into paying tens of thousands of dollars more for them. Maybe Jeep needs to hire some of their marketing people.

Right now jeep could be blown off the earth and the only thing missed would be the wrangler. They're dying. They have the potential to come back well. Unlike land rover, they can figure out an electrical system and a simple door lock.

You can really say that almost all luxury car companies con people into spending tends of thousands of dollars more into their car. For example, he's an easy example, the Toyota Land vs the Lexus LX470. Exact same car, but the lexus is 10-15k more.

[quagmire]

I believe he said he didn't like the Vibe's interior. The interior is one of the things that's different between the Vibe and Matrix, so in this case, he CAN bash one without the other.

Although, having been in both cars, I can attest that it's pretty subjective. Just depends on which style you like better.

http://www.samarins.com/reviews/2006_matrix_interior.jpg

http://www.samarins.com/reviews/vibe_int.jpg


Pretty similar if you ask me.......

[takao]

Does it ruin Daewoo's name or Chevrolet's?

They're being sold as Suzuki here but the information panel in the door jamb clearly shows it as a Daewoo product.

since Daewoo had no name whatsoever the answer is clear ...

i still remember when Daewoo entered the market and nobody knew what the hype building tv campaign was about ... the laughs we had when their cars got revealed were priceless

[Abstract]

The Jeep has been a substandard car for decades, in virtually every respect. Of all of Chrysler's products, I think the Jeep has always been the all-around worst. I'm not sure I understand what keeps this brand alive.

You're right. This is essentially about every facet of that car, except in off-road capability, where they were definitely better than the average SUV. Too bad they're not above par in that area anymore. They're just level with most other brands, who all make an SUV that's capable of off-road if it needs to be.

And please tell Jeep that their circular headlights look ridiculous for a brand whose image is "tough and rugged." They look way too cutesy, like they belong on a VW Beetle.

[IJ Reilly]

And please tell Jeep that their circular headlights look ridiculous for a brand whose image is "tough and rugged." They look way too cutesy, like they belong on a VW Beetle.

I suppose "retro" is the look they were after. They got it -- but in ways they probably didn't intend.

[aloofman]

http://www.samarins.com/reviews/2006_matrix_interior.jpg

http://www.samarins.com/reviews/vibe_int.jpg


Pretty similar if you ask me.......

It's been a few years, although I don't remember them being that similar. Regardless, if someone is being picky about interiors, they could find things to argue about there. I didn't say *I* cared about the two interiors.

[ErikCLDR]

You're right. This is essentially about every facet of that car, except in off-road capability, where they were definitely better than the average SUV. Too bad they're not above par in that area anymore. They're just level with most other brands, who all make an SUV that's capable of off-road if it needs to be.

And please tell Jeep that their circular headlights look ridiculous for a brand whose image is "tough and rugged." They look way too cutesy, like they belong on a VW Beetle.

I agree with your headlight statement 100%.

Jeeps aren't even that capable unless modified. Their wheel articulation is not great and their 4wd is basically the same as most other SUV's that have full time 4wd except for their Quadra-Drive system which has center, front, and rear locking differentials which is pretty dank and the only other car its stock on is the Mercedes G-Class. Quadra-Drive is only available on high end Jeeps though. Land Rover only offers center locking differentials with optional rear locking differentials. Traction control however debatably can do almost the same as locking differentials. And lets face it, chrysler is already making Jeep products on chrysler frames, hurting Jeeps ability to make a seriously capable car. Before you know it, a durango and a grand cherokee will be the same thing. Not that anyone is going to take their Jeep or Land Rover or Mercedes off road, but Jeep is just marketing too with their "Trail Rated SUVs". In their commercials they are driving where ford taurus could go off road. You can tell Jeep is desperate, go look in the newspaper and see how much you can get a new Grand Cherokee for.

I would like to see a Jeep do this. (And the Range Rover overall isn't as good as the LR3/Disco3 off road)
http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/LandRoverRangeRover/Images/OffRoad3.jpg

...Land Rover has its whole set of issues though. What ever happened to Ford selling them and Jaguar?

[bousozoku]

...
PS: The Vibe is pretty much a Matrix. Don't knock the Vibe and let the Matrix get away with a get away from bashing card.
...

I was the one complaining about the Vibe.

The Matrix seems a much better vehicle than the Vibe even if they're produced on the same line. I really, really dislike GM's choice of cheap seat construction. It's as if they want to remind you that the car costs less than $20,000. The other materials in the car aren't much better but everything seems to be made to look cheap so you'll go for a more expensive model. In which case, it just pushes you into another brand because only loyal GM owners are going to buy such a car.

[quagmire]

I was the one complaining about the Vibe.

The Matrix seems a much better vehicle than the Vibe even if they're produced on the same line. I really, really dislike GM's choice of cheap seat construction. It's as if they want to remind you that the car costs less than $20,000. The other materials in the car aren't much better but everything seems to be made to look cheap so you'll go for a more expensive model. In which case, it just pushes you into another brand because only loyal GM owners are going to buy such a car.

It's the same car as the Matrix. Same engine, same interior. The only difference is the badge!

[bousozoku]

It's the same car as the Matrix. Same engine, same interior. The only difference is the badge!

In those I tried, and I looked at them more than one year, the seats were completely different and much about the materials were much different. I don't particularly like Toyota but their version was nicer, especially in that it didn't have bargain basement seats.

[Abstract]

It's the same car as the Matrix. Same engine, same interior. The only difference is the badge!

They were different. However, that's not to say I liked either car.

I like the Vibe's external appearance better, but the Toyota's interior was slightly nicer.

[aloofman]

Funny digression: my parking garage has a Mercury Villager minivan that has Nissan rims on it. Even if the rims were bought later, it's still funny. :D

[ErikCLDR]

Funny digression: my parking garage has a Mercury Villager minivan that has Nissan rims on it. Even if the rims were bought later, it's still funny. :D

I see Touaregs with Porsche wheels all the time.

[aloofman]

I see Touaregs with Porsche wheels all the time.

Maybe the owners are feeling lame for spending so much on a VW? :p

Do you see that many Touaregs? I've seen maybe two ever.