Direction GM's taking Saturn

I was poking around the SaturnFans website to see threads regarding
tires, and noticed another thread: "The Death of Saturn". It was started
by what appears to be a fairly new saleslady who was tired of seeing
negative posts lamenting the direction GM has Saturn going in. Even
though I thought she came across as a bit arrogant, I understand she's
defending her (new) employer. She's excited about working there and is
defensive. That was my take anyways. It started a debate that was
interesting to read from some of the long-time Saturn owners.

For one thing I didn't realize Saturn was doing away with the Polymer
side panels that help prevent dents. According to the saleslady it was a
"division that was losing money" and the owners who don't like the
change are basically crybabies. hah.

Some of the owners seem to believe that GM is ruining Saturn.

I bought my car 2nd hand from a friend because he gave me the trade-in
price he was offered for it when he bought a new VUE in 2003. I had
always said I wouldn't have another 4-cylinder but the deal was too good
to pass up and I needed a better car at the time. Once I started driving
the SW2 I enjoyed having it. As much as I hated (and still hate) how low
the wagon sits, I still have really enjoyed having it. It's roomier than
it looks from the outside. And to me the Polymer is a bigger draw than
that lady seems to think. It set Saturn apart I thought. And Saturn's
prices seemed competitive at least.

Me personally, I'm waiting for a new American car company to start up
that'll give people the opportunity to buy a very reliable car, that's
very affordable, and is simple for an owner to work on without
everything under the hood being crammed together, and still be one
that's stylish and attractive. I'm not crazy about having computers run
things in cars either. I'd like to see a car being sold for $8,000 -
$10,000 that a family could feel safe in and have it not be a piece of
junk. With the exportation of American jobs overseas there there's a
bigger market than ever for a really affordable car.

Whenever I see on tv the old American cars from the 50's still being
worked on and driven by Cubans on the island, I wonder if that could
happen with today's cars in a similar situation.

I got a little sidetracked, but I'm curious about what you all think
about how GM is running Saturn.

Thanks, Jeff

 

The saleslady has a point. GM is not an unlimited source of money for
ventures that never generate any return for the corporation. It simply
isn't financially possible for a small division to do it's own unique
designs for low volume products. The polymer panels have been
problematic from the very beginning, and were much more expensive to
manufacture, even though the raw material was marginally cheaper. They
may also have contributed to Saturn's relatively poor crash test
performance.

Yes, this is why Honda and Toyota are successfully building affordable
cars in the U.S.. The styling may not be exciting, but they are
reliable, fuel efficient, and relatively inexpensive. You can still get
an entry-level Camry or Accord for around $16,000, and it will easily
last 15 years with minimal maintenance.

 

THe main reason they have been successfull is QUALITY. THey are not
strapped with GM's labor costs and philosphy which will destroy Saturn
eventually. The only chance the Saturn has to servive is to split from
GM management on labor rules and vehicle philosphy because they are
abondoning the low end market they started in and focusing on higher
dollar and less fuel efficent model that tend to be more trouble prone
too.

 

I can speak from both sides of the fence as a Saturn owner, former Saturn
salesman and still a Saturn fan although I work for Chevy now.

Most will bash Saturn w/o knowing the history of the company nor knowing
that GM had been cutting their funding prior to them fully joining the GM
family. This caused a lack of improvement for Saturn and arrested growth for
years. Considering that GM has fully funded Buick and Pontiac and has lost
money on them as well, this has to be taken into consideration as well. It
was only a short while ago that GM was considering which of the 3 to close
and Saturn was seen as the most profitable to keep of the three.

Quality and fit and finish are some of the many reasons that polymer must
go. I love my polymer personally, but I have no qualm with perfect fit and
finish, and hydroformed steel panels are better looking anyways. Just look
at the SKY.

As far as safety and crash testing, I'm not sure anymore that to believe in
what I read. Recent crash testing says that the Aveo has a 5 star rating
while the ION is much lower. That's US ratings. In Europe, the Aveo,
otherwise known as the Kalos, and many other names all over the world has
miserably failed crash ratings. Why? Perhaps our tests weigh against any car
without standard side air bags. ION doesn't have them standard.

Do I believe that? Heck no. What I do believe in is the many customers and
people that I have met across the years who have survived major car crashes
in a Saturn. Nuff said. Real life experience speaks louder than lab
controlled tests. I also survived what might have been a serious accident if
I hadn't been in my old trusty SL2.

Change is good sometimes, if this means that GM will make better fitting
panels and still retain or increase safety, great. If thes means that Saturn
will become a mainstream name when people see the Aura or the SKY or Outlook
on the street and this means Saturn will finally become synonymous with
quality and luxury, Im all for that too. Can't wait to see what the future
brings for Saturn.

But I'm not ready to trade in my SC2 yet. ;-)

marx404

 

Change at GM is mostly about cutting costs to boost profits, not make
a better product.With GM having 70% of cost of building a car going to
labor, quality will suffer. Unless they start spending less money on
labor and more on car parts and quality, they will slowing go down the
toilet as Toyota is nipping at their heals now after overtaking Ford.
The future is not bright for GM unless they can get labor cost in
check.

 

the whole thing about saturn and the polymer panels was innovation. gm
and saturn have forgotten that, if you innovate, you can lead, but if
you follow, you will always follow and never win. the consumer is the
one who the saturn is made for, not gm. gm is making the mistake of
it's life by bankrolling a comeback of an outdated gas guzzler camaro.
theres quite a number of fast muscle cars, but few cars that provide
the owner with superior quality and reliability. that's where the
market is.

 

They can't split on vehicle philosophy because Saturn can't sell enough
vehicles to justify the design and tooling costs for a line of unique
vehicles. Remember, Saturn sells only in the U.S. and Canada, despite
abortive attempts to sell in Taiwan and Japan. Contrast this with
Toyota, who sells (and manufactures) their mass market cars like the
Camry and Corolla, all over the world, amortizing the design and tooling
costs.

 

Nice Comment. GM does have a "focus" problem too. It is not the Camaro
though as it is the philosphy of try to keep big iron the main focus
when its time is passing. THis is why Toyota and other have been so
successfull. They did not steal the market, Detriot gave it to them
but stubbornly clinging to old ideas.

 

They started Saturn out to be different but if they just want it to be
another cow in the herd not they might as well kill it now.

 

This discussion prompts me to think about the question, why did GM start
Saturn in the first place? Remember "a different kind of car; a different
kind of car company?" The early marketing would seem to suggest that GM
wasn't as much concerned with the fact that they wouldn't be able to "sell
enough vehicles to justify the design and tooling costs for a line of unique
vehicles" (to quote scharf.steven). If this was true and what steven says is
now true, then I would say that GM has pulled (even if without having
intended it, originally) something similar to a "bait and switch." They
lured us away from Japanese product with the SL, SC and SW lines (polymer
panels, reliable, inexpensive, fun, [relatively] powerful 4-cylinder OHC
engines) and now offer products that are completely different but with
synergies to other GM product. Well, I guess it's back to Asian imports ....
<frown>

 

This is kind of a trollish thread...

A car that makes 400hp and probably will get 28 mpg highway is far from
a gas guzzler. Find me something else making that much power and getting
better gas mileage. There wouldnt be any notable difference in gas
mileage between it and a 6cyl Honda powered Vue. It probably wouldnt
hurt gas mileage the slightest bit to put a 300hp rated LS2 in the
Saturn Vue and gear it taller since it doesnt tow anything anyway. The
latest V8's from GM are downright indestructible and amazingly
efficient. Next time you jab at gas mileage look at the power output.

 

BlaBla wrote: "This is kind of a trollish thread."

Blame me I guess since I started it. I was just curious what you guys on
here thought. And I'm glad I did because I've read some interesting
posts. I have to admit I didn't pay real close attention to what Saturn
had to offer until I bought my SW2 from my friend in 2003. The quality
of the car surprised me, although I wish it had a 6-cyl. instead of a 4.
The inside is set up nice for a wagon, and is a comfortable ride,
especially on the highway.

After reading what that saleslady had posted on SaturnFans, it made me
aware that some folks don't like the changes being made. Some of which I
didn't even realize were happening.

Interesting posts...Thanks, Jeff


About another week and I should be able to get my new tires. Can't wait
to get the Affinity's off the car since they don't have alot of tread
left. I'm leaning towards the Allegra's but the Goodrich Touring T/S
Pro's they have at Sam's Club look pretty nice also. Probably can't go
wrong with either one. And there's only a $4/tire difference with the
Allegra's being the more expensive of the two.

 

They want to exploit the relatively positive image that Saturn had at
the beginning. Saturn is no longer "different," it's just another GM
division. They don't even stick to the one-price policy any more.

 

The problem is that they didn't lure nearly enough people away from the
Japanese products (most of which are not even imports any more). The
reliability turned out to be a myth, the crashworthiness wasn't there,
and the prices, while okay in terms of comparative MSRPs, were high
compared to actual street prices. Saturn got a bad reputation for
reliability with the oil burning and cracked head issues on the S
series. It's hard to overcome all this.

 

Sure, you might have the facts on your side, but it doesn't mean much
when the public perception is different. SUV's are dead by the way, 10
more years, people will be looking at the and asking what were they
thinking? like those veneer wood panel stationwagonsof the 60s and 70s

Also, those mileage stats don't hold up in the real world, just
corporate propoganda because some executive fool at gm said, hey, why
don't we bring back the camaro ? instead of really using his brain and
saying, why don't we just develop the polymer panel technology a bit
more and build better cars than anyone else with it ?

 

I thought that was Saturn was designed for from the beginning.


--
kai -
www.perfectreign.com || www.livebeans.com

Wo ist der Ort für den ehrlichsten Kuss
Ich weiss, dass ich ihn für uns finden muss
Auf 'ner Strasse im Regen, auf 'nem Berg nah beim Mond
Oder kann man ihn nur vom Totenbett holen

 

Maybe in your dreams it will get 28 MPG (with a tail wind at 55 MPH)
It will likely average about half that or less in town and that is a
gas guzzler. There are speed limits and you do not need anything never
400 HP to exceed them in a car nor do you need 400 HP to get there. GM
should spend research money on better MPG cars, not trendy cars to
make a few fast bucks. I drove a old Cmaary with a 4cyl and a 5 speed
for years that would easily exceed 100 MPH with no real effort aand it
got about 30 MPG in town and around 40 on highway running 65 to70. It
had a bad day when it only got 35 or 36 on a trip. Drove it well over
200K miles and its mileage was always consistant and never varied more
than a few MPG in its life. It can be done but GM is not interested in
it.

 

Part of the reason for the lack of lure was GM np haggle price that
chased away a lot of sales. They had a interesting concept but lacked
the guts to follow it through. Saturn prior to about 2000 were pretty
well built overall and there is a lot of high mileage mid 90's ones
out there. Now Saturn are getting to be just like other GM cars with
just a different label on them but the same quality and parts under
the skin which will kill Saturn long term. Dumping the plastic body
parts that were a corner stone for its rust resitance. durabilty and
there resitance to bumps and dings will hasen its fall because it will
no longer be different than any other GM car other than styling.

 

THat was the original intent but it has been abandoned now.

 

The last WS6 Firebird made 325 hp and it received a 28mpg highway rating
from the EPA. The problem was the epa never goes above 60mph. In real
world use the WS6 has been known to get not only 28mpg but also tip
30mpg and that was before DoD. My car is rated by the EPA at 28mpg
Highway and I've gotten that driving hard and doing 75mph over long
trips. In the worst freezing cold conditions when I was doing short
trips to work have I EVER hit the 18mpg epa "city" rating. My engine
NEVER got warm on those trips... I guess some mileage stats do hold up
in the real world huh?

What's so great about polymer panels that you "must" have them? They're
certainly nothing to cry over. They were as advance as they were going
to get.