Saturn article in USA Today

[C. E. White]

www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2003-12-04-saturn-cover_x.htm

 

[chris]

Its really sad. My wife's 1996 SL1 was dying. Previous owner abused
the car. Looked at the Ion first but couldn't buy it. Whoever
designed that car should be shot. Bought a 2003 Honda Civic EX
instead. Made in Canada or Ohio with 65% American parts. I still
have my 1995 SL going strong though at 110,000 miles.

My parents have two Saturns, my grandparents have two Saturns and my
sister and brother-in-law have two Saturns. Since GM took control,
none them like where Saturn is heading and will probably by foreign
instead. My dad always called Saturn "The last American hope." It
really is sad

 

[marx404]

I Just saw on TechTV that CHevy is redesigning the Cavalier and also coming
out with a newer mod-styled design compact car. Looks like GM is investing
it's efforts elsewhere than Saturn.

<< scene fades in to a Satun dealership somewhere in Casablaca, Bogey says:
"We'll always have 1st generations" end scene >>

marx404

 

[Jonnie Santos]

The 05 Cavalier is built on the same platform as the ION - it will be
renamed COBALT. GM will utilize Saturn in one form or another is my best,
unprofessional guess. It's not going anywhere soon.

 

[Dan Duncan]

www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2003-12-04-saturn-cover_x.htm

Saturn is dying because they've lost sight of their goal.

They used to be a different kind of car company, but
they've fucked it up.

I wanted to buy another Saturn. I really did. They wouldn't
sell me the most important option in the model I wanted:
A MANUAL TRANSMISSION
You know, the base transmission that was standard on EVERY
model they made back when they used to actually sell a lot
of cars.

Saturn jumped the shark several years back.

Their new stuff is crap. I continue to drive my 1998 SW2 at 104k miles
with NO major repairs. I've only replaced wear items (third set
of tires, second set of brake pads, and lots of oil and filter changes)
and a couple of windows and a windshield due to thieves, thieves, and
a flying rock. I'm still on the original alternator and clutch.

I'd love to buy another one, but they stopped making it.

Way to run a company into the ground, GM.

My new car? A Subaru. With a manual transmission. Sorry, Saturn.

-DanD

 

[Philip Nasadowski]

I wanted to buy another Saturn. I really did. They wouldn't
sell me the most important option in the model I wanted:
A MANUAL TRANSMISSION
You know, the base transmission that was standard on EVERY
model they made back when they used to actually sell a lot
of cars.

Blame the EPA for it. They're the ones trying to get rid of letting the
driver actually chose what gear a car's in. Automatics today have
lockup, get darn near the same mileage, and can be tied to the computer
for emissions stuff.

That, and most drivers are too stupid to learn stick shift. Heck, I
took my road test on a '93 saturn with stick. I think just doing that
got me past... (ending up on the curb when parking wasn't helping, I
STILL can't park the saturn for shit. The wagon was easy, the van's
easy, go figure)

Speaking of automatics, my dad's Honda minivan is nice, except the
$#^$%^ transmission can't decide on a gear. It upshifts and downshifts
often. Take away the top two gears, it makes up it's mind. I've driven
other Japanese cars with this 'feature', and a few other bad habits,
which makes me wonder if they know how to build an automatic. So much
for superior Japanese design :/

 

[Timothy J. Lee]

Blame the EPA for it. They're the ones trying to get rid of letting the
driver actually chose what gear a car's in. Automatics today have
lockup, get darn near the same mileage, and can be tied to the computer
for emissions stuff.

The EPA, in its yearly Fuel Economy Trends documents, lists the manual
transmission as one of a number of technologies that improves fuel
economy. However, it is easier to control emissions with an automatic
transmission (which is why some of the vehicles that meet the lowest
emission regulation levels only come with automatic transmissions).

 

[Alan King]

Since GM took control,
none them like where Saturn is heading

Periodic statements like this fascinate me. Since Saturn didn't exist before
GM chose to invest 3+ billion dollars creating it and since Saturn has never
not been "under GM's control", I wonder what it means.

Alan King

 

[Seamus' Stuff]

Periodic statements like this fascinate me. Since Saturn didn't exist before
GM chose to invest 3+ billion dollars creating it and since Saturn has never
not been "under GM's control", I wonder what it means.

Alan King

No Saturn has been quite different. In the plant where I came from
management made all the decisions and all engineering changes came from
Detroit. Also all marketing for GM comes from one big department.

Saturn in the beginning had their own marketing department, their own
engineers to design the car, had UAW members working alongside the engineers
to design the car and build process, and had UAW members making decisions
with management on how the business runs.

Now our marketing is lumped in with GM, the engineers are GM standard
engineers who sit in Detroit and only design one part of a car that is put
in to many cars and never come down to the plant level to try to fix build
or quality problems with their parts, and managers make most all the
decisions or await decisions to be handed down to them from Detroit. Not to
mention we had to abandon build processes that we proved were safer and
saved money by decreasing in-plant repairs. Why?...Because we had to go
back to GM common builds & platforms, and had to abandon the build process
innovated at Spring Hill.

So is there a difference in GM control from the past to the present....Very
much so...

Jim

 

[Philip Nasadowski]

Now our marketing is lumped in with GM, the engineers are GM standard
engineers who sit in Detroit and only design one part of a car that is put
in to many cars and never come down to the plant level to try to fix build
or quality problems with their parts

Yeah, Saturn's working with the UAW *really* helped. I spent 25 min
again last night trying to put on the fan belt because some clown
decided that the side of the engine needs no clearance. And don't get
me started on the pain in the ass the water pump is to replace, or
plenty of other wonderful design features....

 

[Jonnie Santos]

There's something elegant about functional simplicity of which seems to
elude automakers.

The no clearance issues give me this visual of a meeting with marketing and
engineering where marketing is telling engineering to put everything really
close together because obviously only high quality import makers can build
to such tolerances and the buying pubic would perceive a Saturn with these
same tolerances as comparable - but I digress...

Of course I was hoping they would have turned the engine in the right
direction (front to back of course), put the transaxle in the tail, and gave
me another 100 ponies before putting the S series out to pasture. Yeah,
right... (good meds, eh?) ...smile

 

[Philip Nasadowski]

There's something elegant about functional simplicity of which seems to
elude automakers.

No kidding. It's not just GM - witness iDrive.

The no clearance issues give me this visual of a meeting with marketing and
engineering where marketing is telling engineering to put everything really
close together because obviously only high quality import makers can build
to such tolerances and the buying pubic would perceive a Saturn with these
same tolerances as comparable - but I digress...

I think a lot of it is the "Well, it'll never be changed" attitude too.
Explains having the drop the engine to change the rack on my old
Celebrity. Well, the rack NEVER goes bad, right? Especially on an 80's
GM car, right? If they had shifted the engine on the Saturn to the
right (standing looking at it from the front) by only 2 inches, the car
would be a boatload easier to work on. Tools and HANDS would be able to
get in there easier...

The Japanese build things small because Japanese hands are small...

Of course I was hoping they would have turned the engine in the right
direction (front to back of course), put the transaxle in the tail, and gave
me another 100 ponies before putting the S series out to pasture.

Chrysler's putting their money in RWD,too bad their current
transmissions all suck hard. I still love how Pontiac, GM's 'excitment
division', can't seem to build a decent car with a V8 in it. Heck, the
new GTO is Australian in origin. I blame lack of cheap high performance
cars on the Nader crowd, though. At least the V6 is starting to become
the norm as opposed to the god awful inline 4s everything had until the
late 90's...

 

[Alan King]

No Saturn has been quite different.

The major difference between Saturn and other GM divisions (Chevrolet, Pontiac,
Buick, Oldsmobile, & Cadillac) is the older divisions existed prior to GM.
They were purchased and put together to create GM where GM created Saturn.

Saturn in the beginning had their own marketing department

So did the other five divisions.

their own
engineers to design the car

who were GM engineers.

had UAW members working alongside the engineers
to design the car and build process

which is a good thing and is being used in other plants as many years of fear
and distrust between management and the union are slowly being overcome.

the engineers are GM standard
engineers who sit in Detroit and only design one part of a car that is put
in to many cars

Two things, 1) GM hasn't had an engineering department located in Detroit since
1993 and 2) If you haven't been able to figure out that GM isn't going to be
able to compete with Toyota, Honda, et al by engineering unique parts for every
car, then I am sorry for you.

never come down to the plant level to try to fix build
or quality problems with their parts,

As a GM engineer who frequently goes to plants to understand and correct
problems, I know this is just an ignorant rabble rousing rant. I have a
co-worker who is going through a start-up of a new product in a plant in a
distant state and he has spent so much time on airplanes that when we see
luggage in his cubicle we have to ask "dirty or clean?" to see if he is coming
or going.

So is there a difference in GM control from the past to the present

Actually, times have changed for all of us and they will continue to change.

Alan King

 

[Jonnie Santos]

....had to do a search on iDrive as I was unfamiliar - found a rant on
cheersandgears and was surprised BMW would take that approach. Technology
is cool (to me) when it's initially invisible and user intuitiveness is
scaleable. I heard a story recently where a new Toyota Prius was coming out
of a automated carwash and the guys who normally drive the car to a drying
station could not determine how to start the car and had to push it.

 

[Steven M. Scharf]

Why?...Because we had to go
back to GM common builds & platforms, and had to abandon the build process
innovated at Spring Hill.

But the reason that GM forced the common platforms is because there was no
way to have a positive ROI because development and tooling costs are so
high. You can't make a profit (a real profit, not an operating profit) on a
platform that sells only 200K units per year. The only way Saturn could
increase volume significantly is to sell in other regions, but they tried
this, and it failed miserably (Japan and Taiwan).

GM is a business. They can't keep pouring money into a bottomless pit, with
no hope of ever getting a return on it.

 

[Guest]

Maybe so, but their return on this change is that it is less likely that
I'll be buying any GM.