[madmanmapper]

Originally Posted by I.Like.Nice.Cars

Hey Madmanmapper, great post. At least you demonstrate you have a brain in your head and know how to use it, instead of spamming and flaming like most imbeciles out there.

lol thanks. You too. People with functioning brains, like us, are hard to come by on any forums.

Originally Posted by I.Like.Nice.Cars

So if it’s anybody to blame, just blame the rednecks, who never will get it (not to mention who will never be able to afford any new set of wheels). What it all comes down to is the almighty $.

Hmm, I'm not sure that I can agree that the redneck fanbase of NASCAR made them ban fuel injection, supercharging, the Hemi, and ultimately stock cars altogether. I'm also not sure that I can disagree.

Originally Posted by I.Like.Nice.Cars

...And because there aren’t any other domestic cars I like, I will in all probability defect (for life) to a German or Japanese car maker.

You poor, poor man. If you must go foreign, at least make it Japanese. Japanese cars suck, but German engineers these days are total dum kopfs. I had the unfortunality of having to change the engine in a 98 VW Passat and it was ridiculous how the car was put together. You'd have a hard time just changing the belts on that car without taking off the whole front end.

Originally Posted by I.Like.Nice.Cars

I also agree with you about the brands that Ford and Chrysler made in the past that are now extinct. The market for cars in the past had changed, is changing right now and will change again in the future. Ford and Chrysler have seen this and adapted with the times. Thankfully, GM is now waking up to this reality and is responding accordingly.

Well yes, the market is changing. I just think that axing a car brand is the quick fix for a company's financial problems. And if you ask me, it will hurt them more in the long run. I think all the American car brands could have survived (except for Edsel, it had far too bad of a first impression) if their products, pricing, and marketing were changed as the car market changed. Oh and of course I knew about the Imperial concept, that's what I was referring to. I'm a Chrysler guy... Mercedes said "it couldn't meet emissions regulations." But, supposedly, otherwise they would have put it into production. Actually Imperial is a good example. Originally it was supposed to compete with Cadillac, then it became just a notch above Cadillac, then back to Cadillac level, and the new Imperial would have been a couple notches above Cadillac and a few below Rolls-Royce and Maybach.

Originally Posted by I.Like.Nice.Cars

I think Pontiac, today anyway, is pulling off the sporty body style on their Chevy-based models quite well.

Originally Posted by I.Like.Nice.Cars

I beg to differ. To me, Pontiac and its offerings are a bunch of bland, boring and uninspiring vehicles (and have been for at least the last 20 years if not longer, with the odd exception here and there). And I don’t believe I’m alone in my thoughts. And really, who wants to patronize a car company that came out with something as hideous and unsightly (to put it politely) as the Aztek?

Well ok. Perhaps I should have said that Pontiacs today are just decently styled, for being Pontiacs, and their Chevy counterparts are styled pretty sporty, for being Chevies. But I still say Pontiac has made improvements since the 80s to mid-90s era. The worst car being the Pontiac SunBird. The whole car was *COMPLETELY* the same as the Chevy Cavalier. You literally could not tell the difference if you removed only the badging on the car. At least nowadays they make a point to replace at least the grille and taillights, if not the bumpers as well. BTW, who wants to patronize car companies that came out with cars like the Honda Element, the Scion xB, the Nissan Cube, the Toyota Prious? I don't know, but they still do, by the millions.

Originally Posted by I.Like.Nice.Cars

They don't want crap, this is true, BUT THEY KEEP BUYING IT ANYWAY!

Originally Posted by I.Like.Nice.Cars

Agreed. Look at how many Chevy Crapolier (uh I mean Cavalier) cars that GM was able to offload on an unsuspecting public. The Crapolier was a really terrible car that people kept purchasing BY THE MILLIONS because the were way too dumb/stupid and especially way too blind to see otherwise. And this was/is not an isolated example in all of GM’s offerings either.

You're right. On top of that, GM managed to do (with some of their car models) the exact same thing that the Japanese manufacturers have been doing successfully for the past 20-30 years in America - selling crap to people that are too stupid to know the difference. But I would have to blame the Japanese car companies for starting this trend.

Originally Posted by I.Like.Nice.Cars

Looks are all any GM car has going for it these days anyway. They pretty much all suck.

Originally Posted by I.Like.Nice.Cars

Agreed. Other than Buick. I think Buick is about the best thing going right now in GM’s portfolio, and killing it would be a huge mistake. If Buick can keep doing what they’re doing, and improving on it (plus implementing the cuts they’re planning), then we will see a Buick renaissance. When I first saw the 2010 Lacrosse, my first thought was WOW!!! I want one. And I’m only 31. Buick is the bet quality car GM makes. If Buick can keep up the quality, keep on designing cars like the 2010 Lacrosse, and keep prices reasonable, GM will be laughing.

I would also agree that Buicks lineup is currently the best looking models GM has to offer, except for the Rendezvous, I think that was just ugly, yet it seems that they sold a lot of them... But as I said, looks are all any GM car has going for it these days. Then again, I've never actually looked under the hood of any new generation Buick, so I couldn't say anything about quality of construction. But GM is GM, same engineers and parts. If I examined a new generation Buick, hmm, make that any Buick from the past 10 years, and if I actually spot something that makes even a moderate amount of sense, I'd probably have a heart attack.

In fact pretty much every car manufacturer in the world today has switched over to stupid ways of constructing cars. Example: after working on a 96? Chrysler Sebring convertible I found out that even my favorite Chrysler has gone over to the dark side. That Sebring was incredibly hard to work on, the engine compartment was so tight. My dad asked me if I wanted to buy this Sebring from the guy who owned it and I turned him down with a "NO WAY!" I'm keeping my much-more-sensible 93 LeBaron convertible. It's an EEK so of course it's built right (for a FWD car) and the only stupidities in it, however slight, are on the engine, which is a (stock) Mitsubishi 3.0L V6. I've already basically rebuilt the whole powertrain on my 'Baron, with no major difficulties to note, so it should last me a long time. So even Chrysler has lost it's sensibility, the only exception being (other than perhaps their trucks/suvs and new line of RWD cars) is the minivan and the PT cruiser - the last of the EEKs. And even the minivan is stupid with the 4.0L V6 in it. VW even noted this sensibility since their new minivan is a Chrysler in disguise. Oh and there's Ford's Panther platform, still very sensible, even if Ford is continually tried to murder it, despite how much revenue they must pull in from taxi companies, police and government agencies, and from limo builders. So Ford is pretty stupid as well for trying to kill their highly-profitable sensible cars.

Hmm you know what? Let's start a new car company together. God I wish I had the money to do that, or to buy Chrysler, since they're bankrupt again. I could be the new Lee Iacocca! You wouldn't happen to be filthy rich would you?