GM's downward spiral: A timeline

[camaro_freak]

Originally Posted by fp115

RWD is heavier, has costly R&D, loss of power in driveshaft, less interior room,... Yeah you are right RWD is just that much better to the majority of customers

RWD also has better weight distribution and performance but that isn't important is it, plus it just looks silly to do burnouts with the rear tires.

Front tires smokin' looks so much better!

[BrickTamland]

Originally Posted by Uzzy

Right, they were coupes and replaced cars that has been coupes for their entire lifetime. GM had other mid-size sedans at the time. I thought the GM-10 were good cars overall and I saw a lot of them around here.

They replaced cars that had been coupes and sedans. Coupes were just far more popular in the years before 1988. GM had other midsize cars; the A-bodies, but they had been around since 1982. They were six years old and were very staid looking vehicles, and were therefore in need of replacement. Well, they weren't replaced; they were supplemented.

Something else important to GM's fall that would not fit on a timeline was their endemic of look-alike cars across the divisions. In the 70s and 80s, Chevrolets, Pontiacs, Oldsmobiles, Buicks, and Cadillacs grew very similar looking. All the shared model lines looked too much alike.

[usa1]

Ah, Roger Smith. The worst CEO in GM's history. That guy set up much of the crap that GM is struggling with today. Thanks Roger!

Mark

[camaro_freak]

Originally Posted by usa1

Ah, Roger Smith. The worst CEO in GM's history. That guy set up much of the crap that GM is struggling with today. Thanks Roger!

Mark

Roger did make tons of mistakes during his tenure but he made them for the right reasons I think. He saw the need to cut costs buy platform shairing but he did it such an extreme that it was almost comical.

Platform sharing is a good idea if done correctly... like the Lambdas for example, but not like the G5/Cobalt - blech

[FLA-USA]

As a teenager back in the early 1980s, how the memories flood back...

My parents bought all GM before 1988. My mom drove a 1981 Cutlass Supreme Brougham Coupe. It was a beautiful car. Very classy. It was a different time, so yeah, it was a bit over the top in todays world, but back then it was a terrific car.

My dad's brother was an engineer for Fisher Body and told us on one of our big holiday visits that all the GM cars were shrinking big time and to get 'em while they last (this was 1985). That year my mom replaced her Cutlass with a Buick Riviera (last of the biggies). It too was what GM did best. Upscale car that drove like a dream. I remember the next year seeing the downsized 1986 Riviera and quite literally felt sick. It was the ugliest, most pathetic excuse for a luxury car I had ever seen. The 1988 Cutlass gave me the same feeling.

That was the point that my parents began to stray from GM. Bought a Chrysler in 1988, and then moved on to Acura and then Lexus in the early 1990s.

So for me, it was the 1986 Luxury Coupes that signaled GM's ineptitude in giving the customer what they wanted. The GM-10's were just an extension of this debacle. And technically, I think the downsized 1985 Electra, Sedan DeVille, and 98 Luxury sedans were when GM finally cracked.

Any way you look at it, GM lost tons of customers forever back then.

[wescoent]

Originally Posted by camaro_freak

Roger did make tons of mistakes during his tenure but he made them for the right reasons I think. He saw the need to cut costs buy platform shairing but he did it such an extreme that it was almost comical.

Platform sharing is a good idea if done correctly... like the Lambdas for example, but not like the G5/Cobalt - blech

That was the moral of the GM case study. They had the right ideas of what to do, but they just couldn't effectively execute them.

Bringing out a smaller sedan to compete with BMW... good idea.

Making it FWD and mechanically unchanged from the Chevrolet Cavalier... bad idea.

[Uzzy]

Originally Posted by BrickTamland

They replaced cars that had been coupes and sedans. Coupes were just far more popular in the years before 1988. GM had other midsize cars; the A-bodies, but they had been around since 1982. They were six years old and were very staid looking vehicles, and were therefore in need of replacement. Well, they weren't replaced; they were supplemented.

After doing some looking, I guess there were some sedan versions of the cars. I didn't know there were any Regal sedans before 1990, and I forgot about the Cutlass Ciera, but it was really the coupes they replaced off the start. I suppose they were intended to replace the A-bodies too, eventually. The Grand Prix never had a sedan before 1990.

[MCGARRETT]

So for me, it was the 1986 Luxury Coupes that signaled GM's ineptitude in giving the customer what they wanted. The GM-10's were just an extension of this debacle. And technically, I think the downsized 1985 Electra, Sedan DeVille, and 98 Luxury sedans were when GM finally cracked.

Remember also that alot of these cars were planned for a future that never came, after the 2 embargos of the 70's(1973 and 1979) people were "fuel shocked" many many analyst were predicting $2.00 and even(gasp!) $3.00 per gallon gasoline by 1985-1986, GM had the cash and the desire to stay ahead of the market, it was better prepared to react to this doom and gloom better than Ford or Chrysler, which were on the ropes, especially Chrysler. Also, if you care to check, would you like to take a guess as to what else was comming in 1985?

Yep, CAFE!!! Thank you Jimmy Carter and Joan Claybrook and all you other American industry squashing car haters!!!

In case anyone forgot the first CAFE mandate was 26.5 by 1985 for all cars.

Anyone think that anything GM was making before 1980 would be able to do that? Maybe the Chevette/T1000? I dont even think the H-body Monzas could average that, but, here was the mandate, and you had to meet it come hell or high water, not matter what the customer wants.(sound familiar?)

It's not like Roger Smith and his croonies sat around on the 14th floor lighting cigars with $100 bills and ashing on babies saying " hey, lets loose a sh**load of market share and money, and lets make our big cars so small that no one will want one, ahahahahahahahaha !"

Everyone looks at some of the downsized 80's cars as being so terrible, but if gas had hit $2.00 a gallon by 1986, who would be laughing?

In retrospect, since I have driven a good portion the downsized GM cars that were made, I have to say, they did the best they could with the pressures and technology that was available at the time, they were, once they got many of the teething problems aside, good, smooth, reliable cars, I still see a good number of Cieras, Centurys, Delta 88's, DeVilles and others from the "bad" downsized era on the road.

As for the GM-10's, well, one of them is still one of the best selling cars in US, the Impala, and as I can recall that as far back as 1992-1993, the GM-10 platform was the second best selling platform in the US, right after the CK1500/Sierra and ahead of the F-150.
(Yes, I own a 2000 Grand Prix GTP coupe)

What happend in the 1980's to GM was could happend to any very very large corporation that requires lots of investments in time and money to change their direction, and is a great example as to why sometimes being the first to react can leave you at a disadvantage if the future you planned for never arrived.

[steinravnik]

Originally Posted by Uzzy

After doing some looking, I guess there were some sedan versions of the cars. I didn't know there were any Regal sedans before 1990, and I forgot about the Cutlass Ciera, but it was really the coupes they replaced off the start. I suppose they were intended to replace the A-bodies too, eventually. The Grand Prix never had a sedan before 1990.

In 1978, GM came out with a downsized A body that spawned sedans, wagons and coupes. My mom had a 1978 Pontiac LeMans that was based on this platform. By 1983, however, the sedan versions were canceled and replaced with the new FWD A body, the Cutlass Ciera, etc. The coupes continued on as the Cutlass Supreme, etc., renamed the G body, until 1988.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_G_platform_(RWD)

[KingElvis]

Originally Posted by 2002 Caddy

The GM 10 cars were definitely major POS cars... They were the beginning of the end for GM... The 1980's "X" car had everyone scratching there heads and these cars were the final straw. They were slow, under powered, unreliable, had mediocre V6's, and they all looked funny. And to make things worse... they cost SIGNIFICANTLY more then the cars they replaced.

You forget that the 79-88 Cutlass was the best selling GM at the time (ever?) and the 87 Buick GN was a major hit and an instant classic... Everyone knew that only one year later and these cars were a JOKE and these brand names were DEAD. Very sad.

Where I live on the west coast you STILL see more "G-Body's" on the road then GM-10's (W-bodies)

Best selling Buick of '84 was the Regal G body.

The thing that gets me is that the G body was pretty small. It weighed about 3400lbs with a V8 and AC.

The replacement vehicles could have been said to have been 'better' because of independent rear suspension, but they really weren't that much lighter.

I've always wondered how things might have been different if they had improved and restyled the G body as the 'personal' car for 1989 - and then have had front drive GM 10s as the sedans.

I've read some auto trade journals from around this period and you can tell GM was bursting with pride for the GM-10. The beer tap door handles I think was a real point of pride. They loved the 'fuselage' airplane look of the Cutlass Supreme's greenhouse.

Still, the problem with this criticism is that it doesn't start soon enough.

Go back to 1968, when GM announced the "XP 887" project. It was, at the time, no more than some specifications in a computer, yet GM promised it would weigh under 2000lbs and cost $2000 - both marks were missed by a mile when the project debuted in '71...

The Vega.

Interestingly, GM never talked about future product before the Vega - the idea being that people wouldn't settle for current models but wait for the 'good one.'

But with the GM10, GM was again playing it Vega-style by promising wonderful things about 'future product.'

Sound familiar? Like: Volt, and "Zeta"?

[KingElvis]

Originally Posted by MCGARRETT

Remember also that alot of these cars were planned for a future that never came, after the 2 embargos of the 70's(1973 and 1979) people were "fuel shocked" many many analyst were predicting $2.00 and even(gasp!) $3.00 per gallon gasoline by 1985-1986, GM had the cash and the desire to stay ahead of the market, it was better prepared to react to this doom and gloom better than Ford or Chrysler, which were on the ropes, especially Chrysler. Also, if you care to check, would you like to take a guess as to what else was comming in 1985?

Yep, CAFE!!! Thank you Jimmy Carter and Joan Claybrook and all you other American industry squashing car haters!!!

In case anyone forgot the first CAFE mandate was 26.5 by 1985 for all cars.

Anyone think that anything GM was making before 1980 would be able to do that? Maybe the Chevette/T1000? I dont even think the H-body Monzas could average that, but, here was the mandate, and you had to meet it come hell or high water, not matter what the customer wants.(sound familiar?)

It's not like Roger Smith and his croonies sat around on the 14th floor lighting cigars with $100 bills and ashing on babies saying " hey, lets loose a sh**load of market share and money, and lets make our big cars so small that no one will want one, ahahahahahahahaha !"

Everyone looks at some of the downsized 80's cars as being so terrible, but if gas had hit $2.00 a gallon by 1986, who would be laughing?

In retrospect, since I have driven a good portion the downsized GM cars that were made, I have to say, they did the best they could with the pressures and technology that was available at the time, they were, once they got many of the teething problems aside, good, smooth, reliable cars, I still see a good number of Cieras, Centurys, Delta 88's, DeVilles and others from the "bad" downsized era on the road.

As for the GM-10's, well, one of them is still one of the best selling cars in US, the Impala, and as I can recall that as far back as 1992-1993, the GM-10 platform was the second best selling platform in the US, right after the CK1500/Sierra and ahead of the F-150.
(Yes, I own a 2000 Grand Prix GTP coupe)

What happend in the 1980's to GM was could happend to any very very large corporation that requires lots of investments in time and money to change their direction, and is a great example as to why sometimes being the first to react can leave you at a disadvantage if the future you planned for never arrived.

Niether Jimmy Carter nor Joan Claybrook came up with CAFE.

It was proposed in '74 and became law in '75 - under Gerald Ford.

If anything, Carter and the Dem congress saved Chrysler with the loan guarantees.

[motorman]

Originally Posted by usa1

Ah, Roger Smith. The worst CEO in GM's history. That guy set up much of the crap that GM is struggling with today. Thanks Roger!

Mark

he was collecting $$$$ millions in pensions while the company he screwed up struggle to stay afloat

[nferr]

Originally Posted by FLA-USA

As a teenager back in the early 1980s, how the memories flood back...

My parents bought all GM before 1988. My mom drove a 1981 Cutlass Supreme Brougham Coupe. It was a beautiful car. Very classy. It was a different time, so yeah, it was a bit over the top in todays world, but back then it was a terrific car.

My dad's brother was an engineer for Fisher Body and told us on one of our big holiday visits that all the GM cars were shrinking big time and to get 'em while they last (this was 1985). That year my mom replaced her Cutlass with a Buick Riviera (last of the biggies). It too was what GM did best. Upscale car that drove like a dream. I remember the next year seeing the downsized 1986 Riviera and quite literally felt sick. It was the ugliest, most pathetic excuse for a luxury car I had ever seen. The 1988 Cutlass gave me the same feeling.

That was the point that my parents began to stray from GM. Bought a Chrysler in 1988, and then moved on to Acura and then Lexus in the early 1990s.

So for me, it was the 1986 Luxury Coupes that signaled GM's ineptitude in giving the customer what they wanted. The GM-10's were just an extension of this debacle. And technically, I think the downsized 1985 Electra, Sedan DeVille, and 98 Luxury sedans were when GM finally cracked.

Any way you look at it, GM lost tons of customers forever back then.

It wasn't just the downsizing or the styles. Those cars were major POS quality wise. The Caddy 4.1 engine was a disaster. The FWD transmissions failed all over the place. People spent big money on these cars and were let down. GM lost many customers for good during this period.

[Rocket 88]

Originally Posted by KingElvis

Niether Jimmy Carter nor Joan Claybrook came up with CAFE.

It was proposed in '74 and became law in '75 - under Gerald Ford.

If anything, Carter and the Dem congress saved Chrysler with the loan guarantees.

How dare you bring facts into this argument!

That darn Socialist Carter saved Chryler while the government ended up making MILLIONS on the loan!

[MCGARRETT]

Ok, fine, but neither did anything to stop it either, and neither one of them is friend of the auto industry, at least the domestic one, (especially Claybrook, shes like a less femine Ralph Nader)and what does Chrysler have anything to do with this?

Either side that allowed and continues to allow CAFE to dictate what manufacturers can sell and what people are allowed to buy, is wrong in my book.