Where would we be today if?

[The Wingnut]

I'm a Chrysler man first (rebelling against my parents, Mom's from a GM family and Dad's a Ford man), but if it's used, it's just a machine...it's only foreign if you need parts, and if it's old enough, the parts aren't necessarily foreign(remans and repros, etc). I was taught by my parents to NEVER buy a car new and always pay cash.

I love my Datsun, I loved my Plymouths, but I honestly wouldn't buy anything new from any manufacturer. The auto industry has progressed to the point of loading vehicles with so many gadgets, gizmos, bells, whistles, safety features, creature comforts and whiz-bang selling points that cars are bloated piles of overly-complex parts waiting to break. They're no longer something that your average citizen with a factory service manual can troubleshoot and fix in the garage on a weekend...all of that changed in the late '70s and early '80s. Manufacturers make more on servicing and producing parts for cars they've sold than they actually do for the cars themselves.

No longer are people getting transportation for their specific needs, now it's all about the image, lifestyle and convenience all wrapped up in something that in some areas of the country costs close to what you'd pay for a modest house! That's absurd. Even trucks are overboard now. You can't buy a stripper model with cloth bench seats, no AC or radio and crank windows anymore. Pickups used to be working vehicles, now they're just another choice when shopping for transportation. Cars that cost less than $10,000 are either used or something most people would be embarrassed to be seen driving.

It's a mess. Practicality and longevity has been overrun by emotion and entitlement in the choices made by the western world's consumers. It's slowly eroding the infrastructure that made the western world the pinnacle of civilization.

 

[scotrace]

I just saw a Cadillac SRX "Crossover." It is pretty much a minivan.

Why would Cadillac even want to field a vehicle in that category? Chrysler's Town & Country is Cadillac's competitor? Cadillac always stayed out of the station wagon market completely because GM understood what the marque stood for. Leave the grocery-getters to GM's other nameplates - that's why they owned them. They had a car for every stage of a buyer's life, and a vehicle to cover all categories. Now they want to cover all categories within each division. It is confusing for buyers, and a foolish squandering of brand identity.
I think it was a huge mistake for Cadillac to build trucks, minivans, and those re-badged Chevrolets. Building trucks with the Buick badge on them was risky enough. You can't overturn a century of brand awareness building just because management says so. You also don't throw away a century of brand building in the name of diversification, which is just line extension and dilution.

BUT - GM took a category in which they were a player, government & police fleet vehicles. and handed it to Ford on a platter by getting out of the full sized RWD V8 business. [huh]


How easily these problems could be dispensed with were I only given plenipotentiary power.

 

[Twitch]

I use the nazi spelling in conjunction with non-legitimate NDASP party era definitions. If I was speaking of "...the years of the Nazi occupation..." I'd cap it.

As Scott mentions, The Rise & Fall of Packard is an informational book for anyone interested.

With the real classic Packards ending in the mid-1930s they gave the luxury market away. I have always wondered why Packard, rich from government contracts of WW 2 didn't capitalize on their vast experience building the Merlin V-12s and come out with a new 12 cylinder to blow everyone away. Oh well.

 

[Flivver]

I just saw a Cadillac SRX "Crossover." It is pretty much a minivan.

Why would Cadillac even want to field a vehicle in that category? Chrysler's Town & Country is Cadillac's competitor? Cadillac always stayed out of the station wagon market completely because GM understood what the marque stood for. Leave the grocery-getters to GM's other nameplates - that's why they owned them. They had a car for every stage of a buyer's life, and a vehicle to cover all categories. Now they want to cover all categories within each division. It is confusing for buyers, and a foolish squandering of brand identity.
I think it was a huge mistake for Cadillac to build trucks, minivans, and those re-badged Chevrolets. Building trucks with the Buick badge on them was risky enough. You can't overturn a century of brand awareness building just because management says so. You also don't throw away a century of brand building in the name of diversification, which is just line extension and dilution.

BUT - GM took a category in which they were a player, government & police fleet vehicles. and handed it to Ford on a platter by getting out of the full sized RWD V8 business. [huh]


How easily these problems could be dispensed with were I only given plenipotentiary power.

Scott, you'll be glad to know that the SRX will be cancelled at the end of the 2009 model year. It hasn't lived up to Cadillac's expectations. It will be replaced with a CTS station wagon.

I agree that adding trucks to a luxury marque waters down its exclusivity...if the brand still has a strong positive reputation. But by the late '90s, the Cadillac brand had been dragged through the mud to the point where it had to be "re-invented". And as it turned out, the Escalade was instrumental in turning the brand around and in getting younger buyers to consider a Cadillac. Today, Cadillac is on an upswing and that's good news.

Regarding GM abandoning the RWD car market and the attendant fleet sales, I'm with you there too. I own a '96 Caprice LT1 station wagon and a '96 Caprice 9C1 sedan. They're both great cars that are a blast to drive! The Impala switches to RWD for model year 2011 so that's something we can look forward to.

 

[jamespowers]

I agree that adding trucks to a luxury marque waters down its exclusivity...if the brand still has a strong positive reputation. But by the late '90s, the Cadillac brand had been dragged through the mud to the point where it had to be "re-invented". And as it turned out, the Escalade was instrumental in turning the brand around and in getting younger buyers to consider a Cadillac. Today, Cadillac is on an upswing and that's good news.

The Escalade is what actually made me even consider driving another Cadillac. There is a huge market out there for not only grocery getters but vehicles that have actual space for baby, children's "accessories" and even more than three people to sit in comfortably.
The trunks on modern cars are a joke. I can't get a full sized stroller in a new car's trunk much less some luggage for a trip. When cars got smaller for a multitude of reasons, people with families went to SUVs because you could fit lots of people and stuff in them. Station wagons just about disappeared for a while so they left us no choice.
Cadillac is just taking advantage of that with the Escalade. They would be stupid not to do so because there is a market for their product with plenty of amenities that people with a few extra bucks will pay for. It ain't a Suburban anymore.
Geez, I convinced myself to buy one now. I'll go look Sunday.

Regards,

J

 

[Prairie Dog]

Gak, there's that UUUGGGGGGLY grill! It was great in 1938, but after 1951, YUK!

I'm in the market for a new vehicle.
I'm seriously considering buying the Lincoln MKZ cause it has a striking chrome waterfall grille.

It's a beauty, lean and muscular!

My wife wants the more practical all purpose crossover vehicle, the Lincoln MKX.

Back to the question "Where would we be today if..... Americans remained
loyal to the "big three"? I wouldn't be driving one of the few American made autos in my hood. [huh]

 

[Lincsong]

The cars would be more identifiable and actually be something to spend more for, if you have the ability.

It's not just the American's that cross parts even the Lexus 350 ES is a dressed up Camry with more horsepower and a smoother transmission, just like an Escalade is a Suburban with a 6 speed transmission and more horsepower.

The American companies have no one to blame but themselves. It's across the board blame; labor and management. The UAW is run by idiots who think we live in a glass bubble; "oh we have to let our members retire after 25 years so a younger person can have the job":fing28: Or another great idea from the UAW as noted earlier; The JobsBank.

Management in the Big 3 is just as stupid for agreeing to such stupidity and now GM wants Universal Healthcare so they can take that off their books. You also have the accountants to blame too, they'll kill the most minuete design because; "well that will had $20 to the cost of the car and if we sell 150,000 of these models a year, we can save $3 million a year, multiply that by 20 individual nameplates and that's $60 million a year". Oh boy, then they end selling only 75,000 cars and moan as to why they couldn't sell 150,000. I say fire all the accountants, put the cash in a barrel and pay the bills that way. GM lagged behind overhead cam engine designs because the accountants said it would cost too much to make them, so GM was still dropping overhead valve engines when the consumer wanted OHC. Accountants would say; "oh the buyer doesn't care what's under the hood, they just want to get from point A to B".:rage:

 

[Easy Money]

They're no longer something that your average citizen with a factory service manual can troubleshoot and fix in the garage on a weekend...all of that changed in the late '70s and early '80s. Manufacturers make more on servicing and producing parts for cars they've sold than they actually do for the cars themselves.

No longer are people getting transportation for their specific needs, now it's all about the image, lifestyle and convenience all wrapped up in something that in some areas of the country costs close to what you'd pay for a modest house! That's absurd. Even trucks are overboard now. You can't buy a stripper model with cloth bench seats, no AC or radio and crank windows anymore. Pickups used to be working vehicles, now they're just another choice when shopping for transportation. Cars that cost less than $10,000 are either used or something most people would be embarrassed to be seen driving.

It's a mess. Practicality and longevity has been overrun by emotion and entitlement in the choices made by the western world's consumers. It's slowly eroding the infrastructure that made the western world the pinnacle of civilization.

Thank the goverment for the lack of servicability, everything is computer controlled the auto technician I have worked with in the past need college before they can work in a dealership. The diagnostic tool cost thousands, a long way from what You'll find in the average Joe's Craftsman toolbox

An article I read the other day was talking about this exact problem. It questioned why we are broke? It stated most people today don't have one but two car payments in some cases over $400.00 a month. The car is no longer transportation we use it to define our existence. Where are we going

 

[Twitch]

I find it curious to remember that before the japanese dumped their mini trucks here NO ONE drove pickups that was not a legitimate tradesman or contractor of sorts. No one drove pickups to their office jobs in the 70s. So suddenly we had these cute little trucks. Not too long after we lost station wagons. Certainly it wasn't all the mini van that killed them but...[huh] ?

Those little trucks grew then morphed into truck-wagons or SUVs. Again we had a vehicle that offered nothing to urban commuters. Rugged suspensions and 4wd were superfluois. All consumers got was the space they lost when station wagons went away. We've come full circle only we're saddled with enormous gas gluping trucks instead of mini-vans or stationwagons.

It is amazing how easily were were led.

 

[scotrace]

Excellent pints about those little trucks, Twitch. I'd never thought of it.

And what of the ever-useful station wagon? Do any US automakers market one? The only one that comes to mind from anywhere is the VW passat wagon. Does the Camry still come in that body style?

The line between station wagon and SUV is blurred now, in any case.

Now this is a station wagon (48 Packard Station Sedan):

 

[dhermann1]

Sooby

Subaru makes 2 great ones in the Legacy and the Impreza. Their only shortcoming is that the AWD tends to be a gas guzzler. But if you're stuck in 2 feet of snow it will crawl right out of it like a polar bear.

 

[Flivver]

The Dodge Magnum is the closest thing to a traditional station wagon that any U.S. manufacturer presently offers. For EPA fuel economy reasons it's classified as a truck, but it's really nothing more than a station wagon version of the Chrysler 300 with some different sheet metal. In fact, in Europe, Chrysler puts a 300 nose on the Magnum and calls it a 300 Wagon.

To their credit, Europeans still appreciate the utility of a traditional station wagon. I think it was the Baby Boom generation that first shunned wagons in the U.S. because that's what we were driven around in as kids. So the Boomers chose minivans and SUVs to haul their kids, and declared the station wagon to be un-cool.

I'm one Baby Boomer, however, that would rejoice if traditional station wagons came back in style. My '96 Caprice Wagon already has 137,000 miles on it!

 

[jamespowers]

Excellent pints about those little trucks, Twitch. I'd never thought of it.

And what of the ever-useful station wagon? Do any US automakers market one? The only one that comes to mind from anywhere is the VW passat wagon. Does the Camry still come in that body style?

The line between station wagon and SUV is blurred now, in any case.

Now this is a station wagon (48 Packard Station Sedan):

That is one cool old Packard Woodie. Looks like its a mile long.

 

[jamespowers]

The Dodge Magnum is the closest thing to a traditional station wagon that any U.S. manufacturer presently offers. For EPA fuel economy reasons it's classified as a truck, but it's really nothing more than a station wagon version of the Chrysler 300 with some different sheet metal. In fact, in Europe, Chrysler puts a 300 nose on the Magnum and calls it a 300 Wagon.

To their credit, Europeans still appreciate the utility of a traditional station wagon. I think it was the Baby Boom generation that first shunned wagons in the U.S. because that's what we were driven around in as kids. So the Boomers chose minivans and SUVs to haul their kids, and declared the station wagon to be un-cool.

I'm one Baby Boomer, however, that would rejoice if traditional station wagons came back in style. My '96 Caprice Wagon already has 137,000 miles on it!

You aren't likely to get another station wagon like the Caprice. Is this one like yours?:

 

[Lincsong]

Here's the scoop with the station wagons. In order to haul a boat or trailer you need to put a trailer hauling package and also to lower the gear ratio on the differential. By lowering the gear ratio that uses more gas thus the CAFE requirements drop for passenger vehicles. The reason a Crown Victoria with the 4.6L V-8 gets 24 MPG is because the differential is high thus it's top towing capacity is 2500 pounds. So they phased out the car based wagons in favor of the SUV's which were originally mostly two-door Blazers/Bronco's and Suburbans. The Dodge Magnum is classified as a truck not for EPA reasons but because the storage floor is flat when the seats are lowered. Yeah, nuts, but what do you expect from the government?????? Chrysler had fought to get the PT Cruiser classified as a truck but the gov said NO because the floor wasn't flat when the seat was dropped. Any Californians here own a Dodge Magnum???? Does the DMV charged you that stupid "weight fee" that they slap on trucks????

 

[carebear]

On a practical note, it's a lot easier to get a carseat and associated child in and out of a taller vehicle (SUV, minivan) than trying to work the straps while bent over at the waist to get in the door.

Also, you're sitting up higher with a better field of view.

Before mandatory car seats, that was less of an issue.

 

[SamMarlowPI]

I knew you guys would like the EFIJY

grab a back issue of "HOT ROD Magazine" where they do a 5 or 6 page article on this car...i have it...the interior is as emaculate as the exterior...different ride height modes, l.e.d lights...its incredible...

 

[SamMarlowPI]

Subaru makes 2 great ones in the Legacy and the Impreza. Their only shortcoming is that the AWD tends to be a gas guzzler. But if you're stuck in 2 feet of snow it will crawl right out of it like a polar bear.

there's a ford taurus stationwagon model also...and i believe mercedes has or had a version as well...

 

[Miss Neecerie]

Excellent pints about those little trucks, Twitch. I'd never thought of it.

And what of the ever-useful station wagon? Does the Camry still come in that body style?

Excellent -pints-? You drinking this early?


and no...the Camry doesn't wagon but the Corrolla does....the Matrix is a corolla wagon...I have one....useful for carrying whole lots of furniture...

 

[panamag8or]

Okay, I'll jump in...

One of our closest friends owns the local Caddy dealership, and I've told him I won't have a new one. I really dislike the angular styling Cadillac has gone to. I draw the line at the '99 Deville, or '02 CTS/STS models. Those are the only ones I would have, until Cadillac changes their design for the better.

The Packard...
They really need to re-think those headlights. They remind me of the Avanti... Ick. They are just dirt collectors, and take away from the smooth styling of the rest of the vehicle. Change those, and I might be talked into one... if they aren't $75k or something like that.lol

The EFIJY...
Love it! Round out the pointy rear end a little, and I would be banging on GM's doors daily to demand they release it here in the U.S. That is one swift looking car.

Ford...
I am kind of a Ford guy, when I'm not a Caddy guy, but Ford autos are so generic right now, I'm not excited by anything they offer. I do like the nod to old-school Mustangs, however.

PT Cruiser and HHR...
It would be nice to see that styling on a larger vehicle. Why doesn't Chrysler make a "Grand" PT Cruiser? Surely, someone can apply the retro styling to a full-size SUV.

Then again, what do I know... I drive a Kia.