GM's TRUE 'Golden Age'....an opinion

[addyguy]

In the globe and Mail today, there was an article about if it is possible for GM to recreate its 'golden age'.

Of course, the article is refering to the 1950's and 1960's, when famous GM stylists created legendary GM cars - the 1955 Nomad, the 1957 Chevy, the Corvete, the GTO...etc...

This era is always looked on uber-fondly by GM fans, and is talked about endlessly of how great it was, how the cars defined the generation, how inspired the artistry was, and it is always opinioned that this is what GM needs to get back to - legendary designs.

But forget all that...just forget it.

Car-making is a business, and the goal of a business is to make money, and have marketplace power, pure and simple. It doesn't matter if the cars look good, if they don't sell, you're sunk.

If you want to find GM's TRUE 'golden age'...you need to go to the late 1970's. In the period of about 1977-1982, GM was close to, or just over, 60% of NA market share. That means about 6 of 10 cars on the street were GM's of some kind.

Say all the bad things you want about 1970's cars....they were bland, ugly, underpowered, badge-engineered, but they SOLD. Even IF someone had a horrible experience with a Vega or a Chevette, chances were good he would upgrade to a larger, more expensive GM car. Many people never went outside GM for their cars, working their way from Chevy's to Caddy's.

THIS IS WHAT GM NEEDS TO GET BACK TO, FOLKS!

I'd love to hear somebody say I'm wrong on this.......

 

[dave1251]

addyguy what was GM's market share in the 50's? It may have been higher than the 60% you are quoting from the late 70's. I remember about this time frame the CEO of GM stated what is good for GM is good for America.

 

[Burt]

The styling of the 50's and 60's led to the sucess in the 70's. The reliability in the 70's and 80's led to the failure in the 90's and 00's.

 

[OtisBlkR1]

I believe dodge is trying this in some respects now with there designs and prices, my opinion hands down some of the sharpest autos on the street today.. but would i buy one ?

I can go down to the local dodge dealer and buy a top of the line all the bells and whistles Big horn all day long for around $26,000 I cant even get into a good Extended chevy silverado 4x4 with half the options for that price.. but ask yourself what your getting for that $26,000 Ive been told many times if you can find a newer Ram with the new Hemi with 100,000 miles on it not ticking like a typewriter youv done well.. that says something..

But man they sure are sharp to look at, and the new cars ? challenger, charger, whoooo-hoooo shnazzy !!

 

[mechanicx]

I agree with you although from a car enthusiast perspective the 70's models weren't the high point and too much cost cutting. GM had mostly a good reputation even in the late 70's and early 80's. The media started pushing imports heavily around then I'd say partly for economic motives and a strong anti-union slant. People were proclaiming Japanese cars reliable before anyone had put any miles on them.

I think there was a period starting in the mid-80's to around mid late 90's that GM cars started to come up short in component reliability and in fit and trim to the best of the imports. But that was also definitely true for Ford as well.

 

[fdcg27]

Actually, in the late 'seventies, GM had the world by the tail.
The downsized A, B and C body cars were exceptionally well designed and well developed.
Ford and Chrysler had nothing close, and the verdict of the market was that GM ruled.
In Europe, Opel was doing well, and GM had a presence in Japan with Isuzu.
The Chevette proved to be a great seller, and was the largest selling car in this market in the early 'eighties.
The X cars promised much, but were let down by inadequate development and multiple recalls.
The Japanese introduced one great design after another from the early 'eighties on.
Thus began the decline of GM.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: addyguy
Say all the bad things you want about 1970's cars....they were bland, ugly, underpowered, badge-engineered, but they SOLD. Even IF someone had a horrible experience with a Vega or a Chevette, chances were good he would upgrade to a larger, more expensive GM car. Many people never went outside GM for their cars, working their way from Chevy's to Caddy's.

THIS IS WHAT GM NEEDS TO GET BACK TO, FOLKS!

Do you not think the automotive market has changed at all since the 1970s?

 

[eljefino]

GM and Radioshack shared the same branding jerks. Woe upon a GM car to have over a certain hp/weight ratio. Woe upon a radio shack police scanner to have more channel memory than the next more expensive scanner: Don't confuse the buyer!

Some competition whooped everybody.

It's nice to see power and styling back in some cars. Halo effect and whatnot. I thought I saw a little camaro in a cavalier coupe I had briefly... I know it's crazy but the seat was low and well bolstered. The gauge pods were similar. The stick shift was on a largish middle console.

 

[Burt]

Could you imagine GM having a 60% market share with just 3 brands? 4 of every ten cars would have to be a Chevy.

 

[chubbs1]

Originally Posted By: OtisBlkR1


...But man they sure are sharp to look at, and the new cars ? challenger, charger, whoooo-hoooo shnazzy !!


Hey I really like my Chargers so far. The Pentastar engine is smooth as butter. I also like the fuel economy 25-26mpg's stop and go 30-32 highway. Better than my '10 Altima 2.5s and '11 Accord EX I4.

GM has yet to prove to me they can put something out that looks good anymore. Many of their models look like they were designed for Avis Rent-a-Car.

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Actually, in the late 'seventies, GM had the world by the tail.
The downsized A, B and C body cars were exceptionally well designed and well developed.
Ford and Chrysler had nothing close, and the verdict of the market was that GM ruled.
In Europe, Opel was doing well, and GM had a presence in Japan with Isuzu.
The Chevette proved to be a great seller, and was the largest selling car in this market in the early 'eighties.
The X cars promised much, but were let down by inadequate development and multiple recalls.
The Japanese introduced one great design after another from the early 'eighties on.
Thus began the decline of GM.


According to R.L. Polk at least in the U.S. GM's golden age was indeed the 50's with a market share of 46.2%. The 70's it was a mere 44.6%.

 

[fdcg27]

IIRC, GM's market share was more than 50% in the US in the late 'seventies, but I'll have to do some digging to show that.

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted By: OtisBlkR1
I believe dodge is trying this in some respects now with there designs and prices, my opinion hands down some of the sharpest autos on the street today.. but would i buy one ?

I can go down to the local dodge dealer and buy a top of the line all the bells and whistles Big horn all day long for around $26,000 I cant even get into a good Extended chevy silverado 4x4 with half the options for that price.. but ask yourself what your getting for that $26,000 Ive been told many times if you can find a newer Ram with the new Hemi with 100,000 miles on it not ticking like a typewriter youv done well.. that says something..

But man they sure are sharp to look at, and the new cars ? challenger, charger, whoooo-hoooo shnazzy !!


From someone who has owned trucks from all of the Detroit Three that is just biased information from someone who just prefers a GM. If there is that much of a pricing spread when I buy my next pickup the GM salesman will not have a chance.

 

[bullwinkle]

I would argue that the Japanese makes, especially Honda and Toyota, got so far ahead of the ('80s) GM in quality, esp. small cars, that it became very difficult for GM to catch up. Add in their legacy costs, including pensions and lifetime healthcare for retirees, none of which their foreign competitors have-basically like running a sprint while carrying a 150 pound backpack-no chance.

 

[johnachak]

I think they're duplicating it right now. the new Corvettes, Camaros, Caddys and Buicks are amazing and the Chevys are a great basic car line.

 

[2Fast4U]

Picked up a 2012 gmc terrain last month. I test drove ford edge, Hyundai,Kia,Toyota,Honda. NOTHING else came close to the 2 tone red stich leather awesome interior that the terrain has. It has sound deadening technology through an included subwoofer. It also has 7 inch touch screen radio that links up with pandora and other stuff on smart phone.

These other vehicles looked like the interior was from the 90's. Most of them drove just blah. If you don't believe me go check it out. The rav4 looks the same as it has forever. The next best interior to the terrain was the ford edge.

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
IIRC, GM's market share was more than 50% in the US in the late 'seventies, but I'll have to do some digging to show that.


http://www.carofthecentury.com/answer_to_gm%27s_market_share_plunge.htm
http://suite101.com/article/the-decline-and-fall-of-general-motors-a100537
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article9129.html

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
I would argue that the Japanese makes, especially Honda and Toyota, got so far ahead of the ('80s) GM in quality, esp. small cars, that it became very difficult for GM to catch up. Add in their legacy costs, including pensions and lifetime healthcare for retirees, none of which their foreign competitors have-basically like running a sprint while carrying a 150 pound backpack-no chance.


I will admit it my quality of life would of been a lot worst if it were not for my Grandmothers GM pension. But it comes to a point when cost become uncontrollable and it takes effort from everyone to cut back. But this is a different topic for another time.

 

[johnachak]

Originally Posted By: OtisBlkR

I can go down to the local dodge dealer and buy a top of the line all the bells and whistles Big horn all day long for around $26,000 I cant even get into a good Extended chevy silverado 4x4 with half the options for that price.. but ask yourself what your getting for that $26,000 Ive been told many times if you can find a newer Ram with the new Hemi with 100,000 miles on it not ticking like a typewriter youv done well.. that says something..

But man they sure are sharp to look at, and the new cars ? challenger, charger, whoooo-hoooo shnazzy !!


As long as they run for 2-300,000 miles and pull like mad, who cares if they tick? I've had GM's tick for over 200,000 miles when I sold em still running. Whats important here?

 

[Anthony]

Originally Posted By: OtisBlkR1
I believe dodge is trying this in some respects now with there designs and prices, my opinion hands down some of the sharpest autos on the street today.. but would i buy one ?

I can go down to the local dodge dealer and buy a top of the line all the bells and whistles Big horn all day long for around $26,000 I cant even get into a good Extended chevy silverado 4x4 with half the options for that price.. but ask yourself what your getting for that $26,000 Ive been told many times if you can find a newer Ram with the new Hemi with 100,000 miles on it not ticking like a typewriter youv done well.. that says something..

But man they sure are sharp to look at, and the new cars ? challenger, charger, whoooo-hoooo shnazzy !!


I don't know if this is typical ,but a friend of mine has a 08 Ram 1500 Hemi that tows almost every day of its life.

On the wknds its his 7k boat ,and during the week its his enclosed work trailer weighing between 3k and 4k depending on what he is carrying.

He's a little over 100k with no engine or trans issues.
His rear diff started whining around 90k ,and they replaced it free under the lifetime warranty.

It was towing pretty much right off of the dealer lot so improper break in may have contributed to the axle issue.

No unusual ticking so far.