Toyota shuts down production and halts sales

nooshinjohn

^^^Polly wanna cracker?:p



The reason for that poor perception is that GM spent decades nurturing it by building lackluster cars that had no soul. To be great at anything, there must be a passion driving you to be the very best, and for 75 years, GM was just that. Once the "car guys" (Earl, Duntov, Mitchell, DeLorean etc) left and the lawyers took over, both litigators and corporate types, GM was doomed. Labor did not help and the fact that there was no leadership with stones big enough to tell attorneys and labor to piss off made short work of dismantling an icon.:(

Serendipity

+1

I agree GM used to build lackluster cars that had no soul. However, their newer product line reflects a change and the "boring cars" are far and few in between.

The Big 3 have been churning out some amazing products lately.

nooshinjohn

Serendipity wrote: »

+1

I agree GM used to build lackluster cars that had no soul. However, their newer product line reflects a change and the "boring cars" are far and few in between.

The Big 3 have been churning out some amazing products lately.

Corvette, Camaro, CTSv, all great cars... the rest about as stimulating as watching paint dry. Nudes of Rosanne Barr and and Margaret Cho would have more visual appeal. I asked a buddy of mine that worked as a designer at GM's West Coast center a simple question. "when will the big shots figure out that it costs far less money to built good looking cars that excite people and make them want to buy than it does making something that ends up in the rental fleets at Enterprise?" His response... "GM does not see the profit margins needed to support doing that..."


I said that until they start building cars again, they never will see the profits they seek and will fade the way of every great car company that failed before them. This conversation took place 5 years ago. When GM failed, I got a call telling me I was right.

He is STILL looking for another job.

Serendipity

GM has some other good products - for example:

How about the GMC Terrain? I can't believe it's an SUV and still gets 32 miles per gallon!

nooshinjohn

Their truck prowess is not being questioned, as I believe they build better trucks than anyone in both the performance and looks departments. The reputation of GM's truck lines has been hampered by the fact that the cars they build are regarded as second rate even compared to the likes of Hyundai and Kia. Back in the day, certain cars were made without regard to profit. Chevrolet, in 1951, was regarded in the very same breath as the failing Hudson Corporation, and something was needed to breath some life into their image. The Corvette was born, and it served its purpose well. By 1955, Chevy was on top and stayed there for decades. Buick got much the same treatment in 1963 with the introduction of the Riviera.

My point being that somebody needs to rattle the cages a bit and build truly MEMORABLE cars that excite the senses and stir the soul. Passion for design and technological excellence should be number one in the business of car building rather than the bean counter trying to save 3/4ths of a penny here and a nickel there. It is also time to fire anyone that runs a car company with a law degree rather than a passion for the automobile. If the guy doesn't drink gasoline for breakfast and piss Mobile-One, then he should not be in charge of a car company...period!

wz2p7j

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Their truck prowess is not being questioned, as I believe they build better trucks than anyone in both the performance and looks departments. The reputation of GM's truck lines has been hampered by the fact that the cars they build are regarded as second rate even compared to the likes of Hyundai and Kia. Back in the day, certain cars were made without regard to profit. Chevrolet, in 1951, was regarded in the very same breath as the failing Hudson Corporation, and something was needed to breath some life into their image. The Corvette was born, and it served its purpose well. By 1955, Chevy was on top and stayed there for decades. Buick got much the same treatment in 1963 with the introduction of the Riviera.

My point being that somebody needs to rattle the cages a bit and build truly MEMORABLE cars that excite the senses and stir the soul. Passion for design and technological excellence should be number one in the business of car building rather than the bean counter trying to save 3/4ths of a penny here and a nickel there. It is also time to fire anyone that runs a car company with a law degree rather than a passion for the automobile. If the guy doesn't drink gasoline for breakfast and piss Mobile-One, then he should not be in charge of a car company...period!

John, take a look at the CTS and Lacrosse.

Chris

Serendipity

The new Chevy Malibu and Buick models are great too.

My Mom has a new Corvette and really likes it so far!

nooshinjohn

The CTS(CTSv) is a great car, and a step in the right direction. The Buick Lacrosse is rather bland IMHO as is Malibu, but an improvement from where they were even 5 years ago. The kind of decay that has taken place within GM will take another decade to fully reverse, given the costs to develop new models, and providing there are no mis-steps along the way, it will take that long at least for the foul stench of the dark times to leave the nostrils of consumers. I am hopeful they will get it right, but I won't be holding my breath.

polktiger

nooshinjohn wrote: »

My point being that somebody needs to rattle the cages a bit and build truly MEMORABLE cars that excite the senses and stir the soul. Passion for design and technological excellence should be number one in the business of car building rather than the bean counter trying to save 3/4ths of a penny here and a nickel there. It is also time to fire anyone that runs a car company with a law degree rather than a passion for the automobile. If the guy doesn't drink gasoline for breakfast and piss Mobile-One, then he should not be in charge of a car company...period!

Just curious, what Japanese made car actually meets that standard. Maybe the Toyota Supra (if it is still being built). Actually, we can throw the Korean cars in here too. The Japanese and Koren cars are about as memorable and exciting to the senses and soul as watching a 72 hole match play event between Cory Pavin and Nick Faldo. Don't get me wrong, hitting fairways and greens and making 16 pars and two birdies in a round is a safe, effective, reliable way to play the game, but it is far from memorable to watch and does little to stir the soul or excite the senses.

Now, I do agree with the whole bean counter comment, but that adds an entirely different element to this whole discussion as the cost structure is very different for GM and Toyota.

Serendipity

polktiger wrote: »

Just curious, what Japanese made car actually meets that standard. Maybe the Toyota Supra (if it is still being built). Actually, we can throw the Korean cars in here too..

Korean Cars:

Kia Soul anyone? Or Hyundai Genesis coupe?

Then there's the Japanese Lexus IS-F which competes with the ///M3...

nooshinjohn

Serendipity wrote: »

Korean Cars:

Kia Soul anyone? Or Hyundai Genesis coupe?

Then there's the Japanese Lexus IS-F which competes with the ///M3...

And the Genesis sedan is pretty nice to look at as well. Corvette, , BMW M's, Jaguar XK-r's, Dodge Viper and cars like them were known as 'Halo Cars". The single purpose for their existance was to serve as eye candy and excite people enough to get them in the showroom. Once there, the DNA of those cars could be found in other, less expensive models. The Corvette/Camaro pairing is an example of that, and even still, the most powerful engines from these cars could be found in every car Chevy made. I call that "trickle-down" performance. And maybe all you could afford for yourself was a base Malibu with an in-line six. Your neigbors wouldn't know the difference because a set of rally stripes and a 454 badge in the right place and nobody could tell them apart.

It takes BOLD, and agressive design to excite people enough to take a look. This type of design should by nature be a LOVE it/Hate it type of viceral reaction. It needs to get people talking and into the showrooms to see what all the fuss is about. The 1963 Split Window Corvette is an example of this. Today, they are revered by all as being one of the greatest cars in history, but at their launch, people were either in love with them or hated them because of that rear glass. The cars to this day are talked about with as much passion as back then and have become the definitive Corvette. They are unforgettable.

The Corvette serves quite well to illustrate the reason for the success of GM, and it also demonstrates quite clearly what happens to a company once the passion leaves. I could leave a post here a mile long on that thought. I could argue that the Corvette, despite being a great car, is only 1/10th the car it should be. (Corvette was to have become mid-engined by 1978, but due to the retirements of every key player in the car's developement, the bean counters shelved the car. You can see it if you google Aerovette)

In order for GM to get back to the level they once held in the public eye, they need to let Harley Earl's Art & Color department off the short leash and run the show once again.

***EDIT*** I found a shot of the Aerovette and attached it below. Look at this and imagine the direction Corvette and GM would gave taken over the last 35 years if they started here with this.

Serendipity

True, once you give their cars a try you'll want to see their entire lineup.

The reason why I am interested in other GM models is because after riding around in a Corvette, I'd like to know what their other products are like (Camaro for example) and how they perform.

If they are indeed as good, then you've got a win-win situation. Heck the Chevy Aveo seems like a Smart car but for less price = win IMO.

nooshinjohn

Serendipity wrote: »

True, once you give their cars a try you'll want to see their entire lineup.

The reason why I am interested in other GM models is because after riding around in a Corvette, I'd like to know what their other products are like (Camaro for example) and how they perform.

If they are indeed as good, then you've got a win-win situation. Heck the Chevy Aveo seems like a Smart car but for less price = win IMO.

The best cars in the world without the style to show them off will be thought of a an ugly car nobody wants. A car with fantastic style that spends 10% of it's time in the shop will still be regarded as a great car simply because people WANT to be seen in it. Jaguar was an example of this for many years. Now they build a top quality car, and a beautiful one to look at as well.

GM needs to have style the matches the substance. For me, they are lacking in both. Having been a life-long GM guy, I will be back just as soon as they are.

C'VILLE

My father worked for Ford for 38 years. I am glad they are making a comeback, didn't take any of the financing and are building better cars.

Serendipity

C'VILLE wrote: »

My father worked for Ford for 38 years. I am glad they are making a comeback, didn't take any of the financing and are building better cars.

The new Mustang and F-150 Raptor are great Ford cars!!

nooshinjohn

The F-150 is not a car...

Face

I wonder if he had a gas pedal from Toyota?

http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-CA&vid=52710183-c36f-47ee-8a93-199e0a3ea58a

Serendipity

nooshinjohn wrote: »

The F-150 is not a car...

You know what I mean.

schwarcw

I want a clunker! Congress took many of those off the market and destroyed them. So what if you need a little maintenance once in a while!

I did a quick calculation. The toatl amount of money that I have paid for cars in my nearly 40 years of driving is less than $20,000. That includes one new car I paid $11,000 for it in 1982. I have owned eight cars. The thoughts of paying $25 - 35K for a new car makes me ill. I drive maybe 25 rental cars a year. None of them excite me.

It might be time to find a well maintained Toyota with about 100K miles on it. Price should be right.

concealer404

Face wrote: »

I wonder if he had a gas pedal from Toyota?

http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-CA&vid=52710183-c36f-47ee-8a93-199e0a3ea58a

Nope. I DID however hear, that he had a gas pedal from CTS.

Face

schwarcw wrote: »

I did a quick calculation. The toatl amount of money that I have paid for cars in my nearly 40 years of driving is less than $20,000. That includes one new car I paid $11,000 for it in 1982. I have owned eight cars. The thoughts of paying $25 - 35K for a new car makes me ill. I drive maybe 25 rental cars a year. None of them excite me.

Adding up how much I've spent on cars, including upgrade over the last 15 years just turned my stomach.

Serendipity

Face wrote: »

Adding up how much I've spent on cars, including upgrade over the last 15 years just turned my stomach.

Well, at least when you drag race you can win money

concealer404

I just added up how much i've spent on my $600 Celica. Ugh.

Jstas

I think that Toyota should be sued by Zappa's family for "copyright infringement".

On the left is Toyota's fairly recent depetion of it's "Toyota Trucks" symbol.

On the right, the Zappa 'stache.





Oh and Toyota has recalled 8,000 2010 Tacomas for driveshaft failure which could lead to loss of control of the vehicle. This one is actually voluntary.

Toyota is also in the news for lawsuits as well. Apparently multiple class actions have been filed. Two of the more absurd ones are one is suing for loss of vehicle resale value and the other is for loss of use of the recalled vehicles.

So one suit wants Toyota to be responsible for accelerated depreciation rates and the other wants Toyota to be responsible for the lost time while the recalled cars are repaired. Estimated damages totals that could be awarded are upwards of $2b.

It's silly and what sucks is that Toyota will probably lose. When the Explorers had the tire issue, Ford recalled them and replaced the tires on customers vehicles, for free. At the time, probably a $400-$450 value. Well, Ford lost a class action suit and ended up having to pay Explorer owners about $500 each in cash. That could have bought new tires and still had enough left over for lunch, a car wash and a case of beer at the time.


But Government Motors, not to be outdone, says that GMAC needs more money to cover bad loans. 'Cause the billions already doled out aren't enough.

Serendipity

That pic is hilarious!