GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
sorry if this has already been asked ... does anyone know what the grand total number of Pontiacs produced 1926-2009?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,570 Posts
This would be good info to have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
Wiki says 3.8 million Catalinas... I know this is true 'cause I was the one who added them all up.

As if proof of my OCD is neccessary, here's a head start:

26-27 : 204,553 ~ 204,553
1928 : 224,784 ~ 429,337
1929 : 200,503 ~ 629,840
1930 : 62,888 ~ 692,728
1931 : 84,708 ~ 777,436
1932 : 45,340 ~ 822,776
1933 : 90,198 ~ 912,974
1934 : 78,859 ~ 991,833
1935 : 129,468 ~ 1,121,301
1936 : 176,270 ~ 1,297,571
1937 : 236,189 ~ 1,533,760
1938 : 97,139 ~ 1,630,899
1939 : 144,340 ~ 1,775,239
1940 : 217,001 ~ 1,992,240
1941 : 330,061 ~ 2,322,301
1942 : 83,555 ~ 2,405,856

1946 : 137,640 ~ 2,543,496
1947 : 230,600 ~ 2,774,096
1948 : 245,419 ~ 3,019,515
1949 : 304,819 ~ 3,324,334
1950 : 446,429 ~ 3,770,763
1951 : 370,159 ~ 4,140,922
1952 : 271,373 ~ 4,412,295
1953 : 418,619 ~ 4,830,914
1954 : 287,744 ~ 5,118,658
1955 : 554,090 ~ 5,672,748
1956 : 405,730 ~ 6,078,478
1957 : 334,041 ~ 6,412,519
1958 : 217,303 ~ 6,629,822
1959 : 383,320 ~ 7,013,142
1960 : 396,716 ~ 7,409,858
1961 : 340,635 ~ 7,750,493
1962 : 521,933 ~ 8,272,426
1963 : 590,071 ~ 8,862,497
1964 : 715,261 ~ 9,577,758
1965 : 802,000 ~ 10,379,758
1966 : 831,331 ~ 11,211,089
1967 : 817,826 ~ 12,028,915
1968 : 910,977 ~ 12,939,892
1969 : 870,528 ~ 13,810,420
1970 : 691,303 ~ 14,501,723
1971 : 586,853 ~ 15,088,576
1972 : 706,978 ~ 15,795,554
1973 : 919,872 ~ 16,715,426
1974 : 580,748 ~ 17,296,174
1975 : 532,043 ~ 17,828,217
1976 : 748,842 ~ 18,577,059
1977 : 911,050 ~ 19,488,109
1978 : 900,380 ~
1979 : 907,412 ~
1980 : 770,821 ~
1981 : 600,543 ~
1982 : 547,271 ~
1983 : 462,279 ~
1984 : 827,576 ~
1985 : 735,161 ~
1986 : 952,943 ~
1987 : 784,349 ~
1988 : 795,194 ~
1989 : 864,346 ~
1990 : 716,817 ~
1991 : 525,210 ~

All the numbers I have on hand. Anyone else got the rest ?? I'll add them to this post if folk want to keep them all together....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,056 Posts
Oh, how the mighty have fallen...

I know around the 1989-1990 mark Pontiac was the third best selling car brand in the U.S., behind Ford and Chevrolet. It's pathetic to think that the once great brand was selling around 300-350k in its final years... Half of those being fleet sales. Pontiac was the epitome of GM's incompetence. If only Mr. Lutz worked for GM a decade earlier, before the brand lingered in mediocrity, overused body cladding, decal applied sportiness and became too damaged to salvage, Pontiac would still be relevant in the years going forward. His vision of Pontiac truly being a cheaper alternative to BMW performance could've come to fruition in the mid 1990's... But a decade later it turned out to be far too little, far too late.
R.I.P. Pontiac
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,441 Posts
Pontiac would be a great Subaru fighter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
>>"I know around the 1989-1990 mark Pontiac was the third best selling car brand in the U.S., behind Ford and Chevrolet."<<

Pontiac was #3 from 1962-1970 inclusive.

>>"Pontiac would be a great Subaru fighter."<<

Except Pontiac got rid of the excessive plastic cladding some years ago.
Luckily for subaru.
Seriously, I don't see it as either possible or desirable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,441 Posts
>>"I know around the 1989-1990 mark Pontiac was the third best selling car brand in the U.S., behind Ford and Chevrolet."<<

Pontiac was #3 from 1962-1970 inclusive.

>>"Pontiac would be a great Subaru fighter."<<

Except Pontiac got rid of the excessive plastic cladding some years ago.
Luckily for subaru.
Seriously, I don't see it as either possible or desirable.
Well what else could we do with Pontiac? I know it's hard for "enthusiasts" to understand, but every brand can't have 3 RWD sportscars. Everyone wants Chevrolet to have Corvette, Camaro, and a RWD flagship. Everyone wants every Cadillac to be RWD. I've even heard people who want Buick to have both an Alpha RWD and a RWD G8-badge job flagship.

What does that leave for Pontiac? Nothing. There's no reason for every brand to have RWD at every brand. Some of those products ARE necessitated. Cadillac must be RWD. Buick must not. Chevy can use a RWD flagship. Maybe if Pontiac enthusiasts had realized the 60s were over and accepted a different kind of speed, their brand would be alive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,056 Posts
>>"I know around the 1989-1990 mark Pontiac was the third best selling car brand in the U.S., behind Ford and Chevrolet."<<

Pontiac was #3 from 1962-1970 inclusive.
I was trying to be as up to date as possible.;) I wasn't really sure on their actual rank after 1990. But we know that the Asian brands came on strong in the 1990's to upset the balance and really change the dynamics.

Amazing that they sold so many cars in the 60's after GM pondered killing them in the 50's... Ol' Bunky Knudsen knew what he was doing back in the day... Along with Estes and DeLorean, he made Pontiac the "Excitement" brand that many of us remember, and the youthful brand that every young and young at heart person wanted to drive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
>>"...every brand can't have 3 RWD sportscars. Everyone wants Chevrolet to have Corvette, Camaro, and a RWD flagship. Everyone wants every Cadillac to be RWD. I've even heard people who want Buick to have both an Alpha RWD and a RWD G8-badge job flagship."<<
Aren't these the people who generally advocated the discontinuance of Pontiac anyway??
I certainly don't fit the "everyone" mold you put forth; I see no need for Chevy to have a RWD FS, and in fact I'd rather see a Firebird than a Camaro.
No reason Cadillac could not be all RWD with zero effect on Pontiac.
Not nearly as many shop with FWD / RWD as the #1 priority as you may think.

>>"Maybe if Pontiac enthusiasts had realized the 60s were over and accepted a different kind of speed, their brand would be alive."<<
Maybe, but subaru is far from the only choice here (generic / malformed people movers + 1 fast model).

>>"Amazing that they sold so many cars in the 60's after GM pondered killing them in the 50's..."<<
That wasn't actually on the table as a real scenario. It was dangled as incentive to rejuvinate the marque- sales were not radically in trouble in the early 50s, just not where Corp neccessarily wanted them. From '50-53 inclusive, Pontiac was #5 - killing the Division was not a real probability.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,056 Posts
>>"Amazing that they sold so many cars in the 60's after GM pondered killing them in the 50's..."<<
That wasn't actually on the table as a real scenario. It was dangled as incentive to rejuvinate the marque- sales were not radically in trouble in the early 50s, just not where Corp neccessarily wanted them. From '50-53 inclusive, Pontiac was #5 - killing the Division was not a real probability.
I've heard both scenarios over the years. I know when Knudsen and Estes took over the Division in '56, Pontiac was sixth in sales and sinking fast, along with the brand's profits. In house, GM was an incredibly competitive environment, so I could very well see upper management dangling a possible dissolving of the brand as a kick in the butt, so to speak.

But I wouldn't put it past the ****y and arrogant GM management, even in those days, to actually consider killing the brand. Another way to generate more competition and innovations in the remaining brands would be to actually kill a Division. Oldsmobile was the resurgent Division in the 50's and covered a very similar demographic as Pontiac at the time. Even though this was a golden age of American automobiles and their sales, Pontiac was bringing nothing new or exciting to the table. They were thought of as more stodgy than Buick at the time, without bringing Buick-like profits. GM had killed numerous Divisions and Subsidiaries prior to that time, though none as large as Pontiac. GM ruled the auto market in the 50's. I could easily see them believing they would make up for lost Pontiac sales through their other highly successful brands, which would theoretically be even more competitive with the loss of Pontiac Motor Division.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
>>"I know when Knudsen and Estes took over the Division in '56, Pontiac was sixth in sales and sinking fast, along with the brand's profits. "<<

I question this. Yes, Pontiac slipped to 6th in '56, but note the sales levels :
'54 : 287K
'55 : 554K
'56 : 405K
'57 : 333K

Buick took a similar tumble :
'55 : 737K
'56 : 635K
'57 : 404K
'58 : 240K

As a student of Buick, I have not read that Buick's profits were 'sinking fast' and that Buick was considered being dropped. Should be roughly the same on the Corp balance sheet... except Buick was doing more R&D than Pontiac.

You have to look @ Pontiac for '55 as an anomoly- it was nearly double the previous year! '56 was still well ahead of '54. And I've not ever seen any relaible, hard facts about the Division's profitablilty during this time period (GM does not report Divisional loss/profit).... The only thing Pontiac was R&D-ing was their V-8 (begun circa '50 IIRC, intro'd for '55)- it's not like there was huge capital drain from -say- '53-56.

>>"But I wouldn't put it past the ****y and arrogant GM management, even in those days, to actually consider killing the brand."<<
GM management was certainly NOT "****y & arrogant" in the '50s, sir. Management is not a function of office or title, but of man. Different men, different thinking, different attitude. "GM" here is irrelevant.

>>"I could easily see them believing they would make up for lost Pontiac sales through their other highly successful brands, which would theoretically be even more competitive with the loss of Pontiac Motor Division."<<
IMO you assume FAR too much WRT management thinking 60 years ago (unless you were there?).
Pontiac didn't 'bring anything less' to the table than Olds did, except Olds & Cadillac got their V-8s in '49, Buick in '53 and Chevy / Pontiac in '55. OK; Olds brought out the Fiesta convert for '53, dead after 1 year. Pontiac was solid, dependable transportation.... it wasn't so much the product itself as it was the 'gee-whiz' mid-late '50s pop culture that started looking for more. Pontiac paid off beginning in '57 with design, the Bonneville & FI, plus more & more racing efforts/ victories. It would have been very short-sighted to cancel Pontiac in -say- '55 when '57 was the ramp-up to a decade of #3 sales and a legacy seldom matched before or since. One could easily point to that as proof GM mangement WASN'T "****y & arrogant", no?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
The conversation is great, keep it up, but what I'm really after is the stats. What about the missing information, production from 1992 onwards? Originally I was just interested in the Grand Total, but I can see there's lots of interest in the year-by-year breakdown and it might be the best way to arrive at a total and to be able to confirm its accuracy.

And to clarify these numbers are production (not sales) by model year (not calendar year) and include vehicles manufactured in other countries when those vehicles were intended for distribution in the US.

Also, here is a revised set of numbers (changes marked with asterisks) that I obtained from another source, so do the number we have so far need some further confirmation?

1926-7 204,553
1928 224,784 429,337
1929 200,503 629,840
1930 62,888 692,728
1931 84,708 777,436
1932 45,340 822,776
1933 90,198 912,974
1934 78,859 991,833
1935 129,468 1,121,301
1936 176,270 1,297,571
1937 236,189 1,533,760
1938 97,139 1,630,899
1939 144,340 1,775,239
1940 217,001 1,992,240
1941 330,061 2,322,301
1942 83,555 2,405,856

1946 137,640 2,543,496
1947 230,600 2,774,096
1948 245,419 3,019,515
1949 304,819 3,324,334
1950 446,429 3,770,763 *
1951 370,159 4,140,922 *
1952 271,373 4,412,295
1953 418,619 4,830,914
1954 287,744 5,118,658
1955 554,090 5,672,748
1956 405,730 6,078,478
1957 334,041 6,412,519
1958 217,303 6,629,822
1959 383,320 7,013,142
1960 396,716 7,409,858 *
1961 340,635 7,750,493
1962 521,933 8,272,426
1963 590,071 8,862,497
1964 715,261 9,577,758
1965 802,000 10,379,758
1966 831,331 11,211,089
1967 817,826 12,028,915
1968 910,977 12,939,892
1969 870,528 13,810,420
1970 691,303 14,501,723
1971 586,853 15,088,576
1972 706,978 15,795,554
1973 919,872 16,715,426
1974 580,748 17,296,174
1975 532,053 17,828,227 *
1976 748,842 18,577,069
1977 911,320 19,488,389 *
1978 900,380 20,388,769
1979 810,279 21,199,048 *
1980 770,881 21,969,929 *
1981 600,543 22,570,472
1982 527,236 23,097,708 *
1983 442,944 23,540,652 *
1984 827,576 24,368,228
1985 735,161 25,103,389
1986 952,943 26,056,332
1987 784,340 26,840,672 *
1988 795,194 27,635,866
1989 864,346 28,500,212
1990 716,817 29,217,029
1991 525,210 29,742,239

29,742,239
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
My '26-42 numbers were from Pontiac, They Built Excitement- pretty thorough & well-done book. '46-63 numbers were from the Standard Catalog of American Cars, which is known to have some published errors. '63-87 numbers were from a production totals piece mailed directly from PMD to me. At a quick glance: the first book agrees with your numbers over PMDs here.
As to overseas production cars..... the Pontiac... book does list production #s for the '88-91 LeMans... so as long as they were intended for the U.S. market, it seems these numbers are inclusive.

1950 :: 446,429 is correct (typo on my part).
1951 :: 370,159 is correct.
1960 :: 396,716 is correct (I had the calendar total here).

Sorry for the errors.

1975 :: model year total directly from PMD: 532,043. (vs. 532,053 - off 10)
1977 :: model year total directly from PMD: 911,050. (vs. 911,320 - off 270)
1979 :: model year total directly from PMD: 907,412. (vs. 810,279 - off 97,133)
1980 :: model year total directly from PMD: 770,821. (vs. 770,881 - off 60)
1982 :: model year total directly from PMD: 547,271. (vs. 527,236 - off 20,035)
1983 :: model year total directly from PMD: 462,279. (vs. 442,944 - off 19,335)
1987 :: model year total directly from PMD: 784,349. (vs. 784,340 - off 9)

Which is right here, esp RE '79, '82, '83, I do not know.

I will look into the model breakdown totals...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
Differences between PMD records & Pontiac, They Built Excitement for 1979...
...comparing...

The difference is sourced from but 2 models (otherwise the 2 agree) ::
PMD ~ P,TBE
LeMans wagon : 27,517 ~ 27,518 (off 1)
Grand Prix : 210,050 ~ 112,916 (off 97,134)

PMD lists a breakdown for the GP for '79 : 124,815 base GPs, 24,060 GP SJs and 61,175 GP LJs. PTBE only lists a grand total of 112,916.

Here's how they compare for the GP :
PMD ~ P,TBE
'76 GP : 228,091 ~ 228,091
'77 GP : 288,430 ~ 288,430
'78 GP : 228,444 ~ 228,444
'79 GP : 210,050 ~ 112,916
'80 GP : 114,714 ~ 114,714
'81 GP : 147,711 ~ 147,711

IDK, but 210 fits better between 228 & 114 than 112 does. The GP was all new for '78- I cannot see that huge of a drop from '78 to '79. Which is correct ??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,898 Posts
Well what else could we do with Pontiac? I know it's hard for "enthusiasts" to understand, but every brand can't have 3 RWD sportscars. Everyone wants Chevrolet to have Corvette, Camaro, and a RWD flagship. Everyone wants every Cadillac to be RWD. I've even heard people who want Buick to have both an Alpha RWD and a RWD G8-badge job flagship.

What does that leave for Pontiac? Nothing. There's no reason for every brand to have RWD at every brand. Some of those products ARE necessitated. Cadillac must be RWD. Buick must not. Chevy can use a RWD flagship. Maybe if Pontiac enthusiasts had realized the 60s were over and accepted a different kind of speed, their brand would be alive.
keep in mind that back in the day, like EVERY brand had a RWD performance car
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,056 Posts
As a student of Buick, I have not read that Buick's profits were 'sinking fast' and that Buick was considered being dropped. Should be roughly the same on the Corp balance sheet... except Buick was doing more R&D than Pontiac.
Sure, but Buick sold at a much higher price than Pontiac... And let's not forget that "GM" itself was formed to support the Buick brand. It's never going anywhere. Also, the years you included, 1957 & '58, were after Knudsen & Estes took over Pontiac. All "talk" of a Pontiac exit was before they were aboard.

>>"But I wouldn't put it past the ****y and arrogant GM management, even in those days, to actually consider killing the brand."<<
GM management was certainly NOT "****y & arrogant" in the '50s, sir. Management is not a function of office or title, but of man. Different men, different thinking, different attitude. "GM" here is irrelevant.

>>"I could easily see them believing they would make up for lost Pontiac sales through their other highly successful brands, which would theoretically be even more competitive with the loss of Pontiac Motor Division."<<
IMO you assume FAR too much WRT management thinking 60 years ago (unless you were there?).
My goodness, did we touch a nerve? Relax friend. No one's trying to take a cheap shot here... Gee, what would make the men in management at GM, if that makes you feel better, arrogant? Hmmm, being the kings of the largest and most successful company on earth just may do it.:rolleyes: But to spell it out for you more clearly, I've been hearing the stories for the better part of three decades from two uncles who were there. One worked in Mr. Estes' office, and knew him well, from 1959 until 1961, when he started working in a different capacity with John DeLorean until 1966, when he took a high position with Boeing. My other uncle worked R&D (engine design) with GM, starting with Pontiac in 1961, until his retirement in 1997.
Both gentlemen had constant contact, especially the first I described, with upper management. All the stories I've been told regarding management included snippets of their collective arrogance. That's not necessarily a bad thing. But it seems to have upset you. Let me be the first to say that both of my uncles were/are very ****y themselves. They're both very good at what they do and they know it.
Also, they do not know themselves if GM was ever serious about Pontiac closing shop at the time. They do know, however, that Mr. Estes' main goal was that the Division show something new or innovative every year. Whether that was a result of upper management using a little shock treatment to light a fire at Pontiac or if it was something Mr. Estes carried with him either personally or from his days at Oldsmobile, no one knows.
Pontiac didn't 'bring anything less' to the table than Olds did, except Olds & Cadillac got their V-8s in '49, Buick in '53 and Chevy / Pontiac in '55. OK; Olds brought out the Fiesta convert for '53, dead after 1 year. Pontiac was solid, dependable transportation.... it wasn't so much the product itself as it was the 'gee-whiz' mid-late '50s pop culture that started looking for more. Pontiac paid off beginning in '57 with design, the Bonneville & FI, plus more & more racing efforts/ victories. It would have been very short-sighted to cancel Pontiac in -say- '55 when '57 was the ramp-up to a decade of #3 sales and a legacy seldom matched before or since. One could easily point to that as proof GM mangement WASN'T "****y & arrogant", no?
I agree it would've been short sighted to have canceled Pontiac in '55. But you have to remember, the ramp up of that great decade after 1957 was after GM had changed the heads of the Pontiac Division in 1956. It was under the direction of Knudsen, Estes and later DeLorean that Pontiac changed their fortune. Had the replacements at the top of Pontiac been others without the vision and know how of these gentlemen, there's no telling if Pontiac would have survived into the 1960's. You're looking at things from 2009 eyes, having seen what came to be post 1957. GM management did not know what was to come from the future of Pontiac. It was the 1959 Catalina, the first "wide track" car, that really changed things for Pontiac. For the first time, they were at the forefront of an automotive movement. There was no telling in '56 that these '59 models would be the real start of Pontiac's greatest era, and the start of a new way of thinking of the automotive culture. No, I do not believe this proves in any way that the management was not "****y & arrogant," not in the least bit. It just means they were very good at both nurturing talent and putting them in position to succeed. Which speaks volumes about their own talent. They had reason to be ****y. At least back in the 50's & 60's their ****iness was justified...

Thank you for your sales figures, they were informative. I'm sorry you took personally any perceived negative comments regarding GM management. I have nothing but the highest respect for the men in charge back then. Pontiac was one of my three favorite brands, I would never try to disparage its good name. What it comes down to is this, did GM really consider closing Pontiac in the 50's? I do not know for sure. I've seen enough in this world to not be surprised at anything. And from what I know of GM's insular culture of the time, my knowledge being second hand, I would not be surprised if it was considered.

Just for a little enjoyment and historic perspective, here's a little piece from an article on the beginning of the Knudsen/Estes era at Pontiac:

Estes was a little hesitant at first about leaving so successful a division as Oldsmobile. "After all," he figured, "Olds was a fast stepper, while Pontiac was certainly not." But after a bit of prodding by both Knudsen and Harley Earl, then GM's styling vice president, Estes agreed to the challenge, and Pontiac has been sailing and selling on the right course ever since.
There was naturally quite a transition ahead for the genial Estes. After all, he'd been working at Oldsmobile for 10 years as an engine development engineer and later as assistant chief engineer. It's not easy to switch allegiances overnight. But for Estes, a very flexible man in his ways, the changeover caused few problems. "I just had all my Oldsmobile blood drained out one night," he recalls smilingly, "and had Pontiac blood pumped in the next morning. That's all there was to it." That morning was September 1, 1956 — the day he started work as Pontiac's chief engineer. It marked the beginning of a success era unequaled in recent automotive history.
It wasn't long before the effects of the Knudsen-Estes one-two punch were being felt at 895 Joslyn Avenue, the divisional engineering headquarters. The two held around-the-clock conferences with their engineering staff. They quickly learned that Pontiac was in trouble — bad trouble. The car was dull and unimaginative. Things weren't too hot with the manufacturing people either. Morale at the plant was at an all-time low. Same story out in the field. Pontiac dealers were in a state of deep depression.
But with Knudsen and Estes at the helm, things would soon pick up. They pledged an all-out, no-holds-barred effort to everyone. Pontiac would rise again.
The year they joined Pontiac, the division's sales slogan was "Pontiac the 100,000-mile car." Did this mean Pontiac would run for 100,000 miles? Or did it mean its performance was like that of a car that had already run 100,000 miles? Estes likes to tell the story of a Pontiac executive standing on the sidelines at Daytona Beach in the late '50s watching a stock-car race. When a Pontiac put on a sudden burst of speed, a young spectator yelled: "Hey, look at that grandma go!"
At the time, there was a new accent on youth in this country, and both Knudsen and Estes figured Pontiac's best chance was to appeal to the 20-to-30-year-old group. "You can sell older people a young car, but you can't sell young people an older car," Knudsen and Estes argued as they set about changing Pontiac's grandma image.
The day after he took over, Knudsen headed for the division's styling studio to get his first look at the proposed 1957 Pontiac. It was then only a month from pilot production and two months from volume production. Around the fiberglass pilot model stood a clutch of proud stylists. Knudsen walked around their pride and joy a couple of times, stopped, backed off a bit, and took another hard look. He moved around to the front, quietly stroking his nose in a manner others at Pontiac later came to recognize with foreboding. Finally, as though he couldn't stand it any longer, Knudsen said, "Let's take the silver streaks off. That's the biggest change we can make in the shortest time. And I don't ever want to see them again."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,119 Posts
^^ It sounds, based on the last sentence or two of the previous post, like removing cladding helped make Pontiac a great brand. How ironic...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,400 Posts
I don't think the silver hood "streaks" were all bad. Could have been executed better though, more like a full hood length vent? A modern interpertation would have been interesting, as they seemed like a precursor to the ram-air hood scoops with the character lines running back along the hood.

About the production numbers though, do they include Canadian only models? Parisienne? Firefly? 90's Tempest?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
About the production numbers though, do they include Canadian only models? Parisienne? Firefly? 90's Tempest?
The production numbers should not include the Canadian only models. Not that I have anything against the Canadian only models, but I'm just going by what Pontiac themselves would have counted (and not counted) for official "milestone" purposes (ie. 10 millionth, 20 millionth, 30 millionth, etc.)

If anyone has Canadian only model production number, yes, please post them, but we should accumulate them seperately.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top