woody90gtz wrote:I hear people whine about it from both sides. GM brings too many names back. GM doesn't bring enough names back. Blah blah blah.
The new Impala, Monte Carlo, Malibu...none of them are anything like the old ones and people moan they don't deserve the name plate. Then Dodge resurrects the Dart as a FWD 4-banger and everyone drools over it. And the new Charger isn't even available as a 2-door. Stupid.
Fact is: a lot of GM names got a bad reputation because of cars that were less than reliable (Vega, Cavalier, Beretta, etc...) resurrecting those names would not be a good idea for sales.
DanteGTZ wrote:Anyway, as for GM - Honestly, a Chevrolet (or any GM dealer) is about the LAST place I'd go to shop for a new car. They have swerved so far from cool these days, I don't think they deserve to be in business anymore. All of this, coming from someone who 5-10 years ago was an avid GM enthusiast. GM made some cool cars way back when and up until the mid-90s, but after that things go WAY too cookie cutter for my tastes. I remember looking at the 95-99 Cavalier because I really liked (and still do) the way it looked. It wasn't until I sat in one that I was completely turned off to them. The interiors were just cheap, totally lackluster interiors that couldn't hold a candle to anything from Japan. Even the seats were just total junk. All of this from a company that just a few years earlier were building Z26s with supportive/adjustable buckets that actually had a "racy" look.
Follow the Cavalier/Sunfire "blech" with "performance" vehicles like the GTP, GA GT, and many other V6 GM cars with AUTOMATICS as the only transmission option! The Cobalt was another car that just screams boring to me. I'm sorry to those that own them, but I think much of it's hype was generated only by those that had no other options from GM. To me, it looks like a poorly updated Cavalier and the proportions are all wrong.
The only product line that even remotely appealed to me in the mid-2000s was Pontiac and we all know where that went. Unfortunately for Pontiac, I think GM just overpriced the cars that people really wanted (G8 GT/GXP) and people just aren't buying base models when they really want the "Z" car anymore - They'll shop elsewhere.
Just my $.02. Until GM gets their heads out of their ass, I'll continue to buy only the older used models.
Woody, I agree with almost everything you said (except for Berettas and Cavaliers being unreliable -I think they were as good and as bad as anything else made back then
) -and we've all seen and heard it over and over -people clamor about wanting something 'new and fresh', but when they get it, they want what they used to have. Then, when that is offered back up, the manufacturers are mocked and given the finger for being 'dated'. I remember very clearly when the "Impala" was reintroduced -it wasn't very long ago- and how GM pointed more at the car's legacy than at the car itself. I thought that was actually quite nice, but it is still unlikely that I'd buy one of the new ones. But honestly, that holds true for almost everything being produced right now, I wouldn't buy new unless walking was my only alternative.
Dante, I have two '97 5-speed Cavaliers, and I love them both, but the only things exciting about them is how little they cost, how well they handle, and how quick my turbo-charged one is since I modified it very far from stock -I too like the look of them, but yeah, despite both of them being Z-24s, they are entry-level cars, and they look like it. How much plastic can you put inside one car? (The seats are really comfy for me though, so no complaints there..) Of the baker's dozen+ GM cars I own, none of them are newer than '97. I completely agree, GM needs to think different, or die altogether and let several smaller new companies take the place -if they are "too big to fail", then that is when they
need to fail. But anyway, to me all the Pontiacs started looking the same, and that too was boring. The G8 wasn't well received because it wasn't well advertised, despite being good-looking it didn't stand out in styling, and was over-priced -hey, I think that was kind of what you just said!
And yes, new cars are BORING, GM's and all the others', too. Very few interest me, and virtually none excite, especially with all the automated crap loaded into them. Automatic transmissions suck, I don't care how many gears they have, and even the "Sport Shift" or "Semi-Automatic" variations are at best a compromise -when I am in a car, I like to
drive it, not just
steer it, thanks.
Unfortunately, cars can't ever be the same as they were and still be marketable, because people have changed, society has changed, the culture is different now. Older classics are great examples of this -one of my cars has power
nothing -no power steering, no power brakes, no power windows or locks, no A/C, no cruise, no intermittent wipers, no rear window electric defrost, the driver actually has to
shift the transmission (4-speed) and clutch accordingly, turn the headlights on
manually, whoah! the brakes are all drum!
Seriously, just try marketing a car like that, it wouldn't sell in today's market, where everyone wants their car to 'sync' with their laptop/ipod/gamecube or whatever, come equipped with Blue-Ray players and a TV screen for each seat, parallel-park automatically for them and remind them to check their mirrors and stay in their own lane, etc, etc, etc. People want comfort, convenience, gadgets. Toys. They are lulled into a false sense of safety by the machines they are supposed to be operating doing the operations for them. Simplified transportation is simply out of the question. Yep, new cars are more than just cars, more than transportation, even more than the basic machine that the word 'car' used to mean. You can keep it, I'll take my old rattle-traps, thank-you-very-much.
Sorry if I started to rant there, at least I wasn't as bad as
DOHC Tuner, seriously man, switch to decaf!
(sorry, I do hear you though
).
......RIP
