Why GM will STILL fail, part deux

Here's why.
I mean, what else did GM have going for it except the gubment's money? They let a few old timers go and replaced them with younger folks, good and bad move at the same time. But let's face it, Bob is all they really have anymore.
Are we going to see the return of 2 or 3 platforms rebadged as 20 or 30 "different" models? Are they going to bring back Cadillacs with hubcaps and trucks with sub par diesel engines?

Lutz also spearheaded the Chevrolet Volt program. The fruits of that work will come this fall when GM starts selling the car, which is engineered to run purely on electric power for 40 miles. Lutz had to make three passes at now-fired GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner to get an electric car approved.

Again, another Volt inspired golden parachute.

If they insist on having electrics, why not revisit the old EV-1? The hard work was already done. All they have to do is update it. OTOH, if you can use a car that's only good for 40 miles at a crack, why bother? How much has been invested in the Volt? And that's the best they can come up with? There's people here that can accomplish that with a whole lot less($201x budget) money.

Jesus "Berkleyin'" Christ, when did the forum become a free-for-all in bashing GM. You guys need a new hobby, like maybe wrenching on cars more!

Klueless, we are not bashing GM. I personally want GM to succeed because 1: I live in a GM town 2: I have GM relatives 3: I LIKE their products

I posted my Why GM will still fail thread because it seem GMs best are leaving the company to go to work for destined to fail startups but pulling out with a huge parachute.

This thread is just like my thread, as much of an asshat Maximum Bob is he was the last remaining car guy left in the GM boardroom.

GM are skrood.

I'm not "bashing GM" here. Bob Lutz is the only thing GM had going for it. Like John said, many of the real talent left and he was the driving force behind the improvements made there. Do you really want a Lumina re-badged as 10 different cars, trucks, vans and scooters? GM was an automotive punchline for decades and just as they get off the floor another blow comes. And as far as the wrenching comment Klueless, some of us here support out wives and children with a snap on wrench and a (freaking big) hammer.

Was Lutz really that great though? What products did he push at GM that really made a positive impact with the consumer and actually sold in volumes that made GM a profit? I know he was behind the GTO which didn't really do that well, the SSR which was worse, and the Volt which has yet to go on sale. G8 was shaping up to be something decent but the division got axed before it had a chance, and Solstice was hot for about a year then held down dealer lots.

So I'm not sure if Lutz was that great of an influence, but my fear is that there's no one as good as he was at whatever it is he did.

He was behind exciting cars for enthuasists , but not so much sales success.

I saw a Volt yesterday night on my way home, Not sure if it will make it to the production version but the headlights were black until they turned them on , kind of neat.

minimac wrote: If they insist on having electrics, why not revisit the old EV-1? The hard work was already done. All they have to do is update it. OTOH, if you can use a car that's only good for 40 miles at a crack, why bother? How much has been invested in the Volt? And that's the best they can come up with? There's people here that can accomplish that with a whole lot less($201x budget) money.

I saw a program on the Volt and it is based on what they learned in the EV1 program. Bryce may know more, but I know things like the battery shape and type of engine controllers are all from the EV1.

Here is a quote from another Lutz retirement article -

"It’s gotten a little scary. Everything has been so good since I got here [at GM] that I’ve been thinking there really is no place to go but down because not all of my ideas will succeed. No one bats 1.000. It’s been so nice that it’s been a bit disconcerting."

This is bizarre to me. He apparently thinks GM has been an unmitigated success since 2002. Am I missing something or is he completely senile?

klipless wrote: Jesus "Berkleyin'" Christ, when did the forum become a free-for-all in bashing GM. You guys need a new hobby, like maybe wrenching on cars more!

I find it pretty berkeleying tiring.

We can't rename the thread to "We really love GM and are tired of seeing their best employees leave" and "We really love GM and are tired of seeing their best employees leave Part Deaux" so those who think we are bashing GM need to actually read the threads.

yes! I have only owned GM and will continue to do so. (Although you guys really know how to push the Miata kool-aid)

DrDick*:

If it walks like it's bashing, and sounds like it's bashing...then guess what, it probably is! No need to get personal about the wrenching comment either. It wasn't a knock on those who do that for a job, it was meant to draw focus on the fact that this forum is supposed to be focusing on helping each other make fast and fun cars for not a lot of dough. If I wanted armchair quarterbacking, then I'd head over to autoblog, ttac, etc. If it makes you feel better feel free to substitute in "collect more stamps", or "build better kayaks" for "wrench on cars more".

*if we're going to start childish name calling, I want in on that s@&t!

Otto_Maddox wrote: Here is a quote from another Lutz retirement article - "It’s gotten a little scary. Everything has been so good since I got here [at GM] that I’ve been thinking there really is no place to go but down because not all of my ideas will succeed. No one bats 1.000. It’s been so nice that it’s been a bit disconcerting." This is bizarre to me. He apparently thinks GM has been an unmitigated success since 2002. Am I missing something or is he completely senile?

O.o

Otto_Maddox wrote: This is bizarre to me. He apparently thinks GM has been an unmitigated success since 2002. Am I missing something or is he completely senile?

I think it's like the frog in the boiling water thing.

Put him in water that's boiling and he freaks out.

Bring the water to a boil slowly and he'll stay in and cook.

It's been bad for so long that Bob doesn't really know any better.

Shawn

Otto_Maddox wrote: This is bizarre to me. He apparently thinks GM has been an unmitigated success since 2002. Am I missing something or is he completely senile?

Look at the 2001 GM lineup and the 2010 GM lineup. I would say there's been a DRASTIC improvement in the offerings. Not perfect, but a hell of a lot better, and I think Lutz can take credit for helping to create that change. It sure is nice to have an enthusiast in the top ranks to keep the bean counters in check (for any type of product).

Bryce

klipless wrote: DrDick*: If it walks like it's bashing, and sounds like it's bashing...then guess what, it probably is! No need to get personal about the wrenching comment either. It wasn't a knock on those who do that for a job, it was meant to draw focus on the fact that this forum is supposed to be focusing on helping each other make fast and fun cars for not a lot of dough. If I wanted armchair quarterbacking, then I'd head over to autoblog, ttac, etc. If it makes you feel better feel free to substitute in "collect more stamps", or "build better kayaks" for "wrench on cars more". *if we're going to start childish name calling, I want in on that s@&t!

Ok Klipless, clueless or whatever. I wasn't the one who got personal. I was simply informing you that I do indeed wrench on things, better than most folks I must say. If you don't like GM bashing, don't read posts that clearly are not going to be a love-fest for GM. Now, I'm the first to admit that I don't like GM. I've worked on too many of them and picked up on too many engineering guffaws. I also see them pushing out boring cars with flaccid chassis and sticking an "SS" badge on it hoping to cash in on the glory days when they were a great car company and had good products to offer. As a car enthusiast I've seen the track record of GM producing a car that is nearly decent, improving it over the years and just when they get it right, they drop it (read Fiero, Corvair, Sky/Solstice, Cimarron.....oops forget that one).
There's a reason you would be hard-pressed to hear anyone bashing BMW, it's because they consistently make interesting cars with a great chassis, powered by a wonderful engine that an enthusiast would love. If they sold a Lumina with NASCAR numbers on the side and raised-yellow letter tires the folks here (all die-hard car enthusiasts) would be less than enthusiastic.
I see you are new here so I'll cut you a bit of slack, as I bet a few others already have.

"It truly is the end of an era. Bob Lutz, the cocksure maverick who led a product renaissance at both General Motors and Chrysler, will retire effective May 1. When Lutz goes, the industry will lose one of its best car guys and a strong personality known as much for his gravelly pronouncements at auto shows as he was for the automobiles he helped create."

"cockshure maverick" ??? Sounds like it was written by a Sarah Palin fan. I wonder if they can see Russia from their yard as well.

On the other hand, some of the more recent cars from GM weren't overly terrible - the C6 Vette, G8, the more interesting Caddys.

DrBoost wrote:

klipless wrote: DrDick*: If it walks like it's bashing, and sounds like it's bashing...then guess what, it probably is! No need to get personal about the wrenching comment either. It wasn't a knock on those who do that for a job, it was meant to draw focus on the fact that this forum is supposed to be focusing on helping each other make fast and fun cars for not a lot of dough. If I wanted armchair quarterbacking, then I'd head over to autoblog, ttac, etc. If it makes you feel better feel free to substitute in "collect more stamps", or "build better kayaks" for "wrench on cars more". *if we're going to start childish name calling, I want in on that s@&t!

Ok Klipless, clueless or whatever. I wasn't the one who got personal. I was simply informing you that I do indeed wrench on things, better than most folks I must say. If you don't like GM bashing, don't read posts that clearly are not going to be a love-fest for GM. Now, I'm the first to admit that I don't like GM. I've worked on too many of them and picked up on too many engineering guffaws. I also see them pushing out boring cars with flaccid chassis and sticking an "SS" badge on it hoping to cash in on the glory days when they were a great car company and had good products to offer. As a car enthusiast I've seen the track record of GM producing a car that is nearly decent, improving it over the years and just when they get it right, they drop it (read Fiero, Corvair, Sky/Solstice, Cimarron.....oops forget that one). There's a reason you would be hard-pressed to hear anyone bashing BMW, it's because they consistently make interesting cars with a great chassis, powered by a wonderful engine that an enthusiast would love. If they sold a Lumina with NASCAR numbers on the side and raised-yellow letter tires the folks here (all die-hard car enthusiasts) would be less than enthusiastic. I see you are new here so I'll cut you a bit of slack, as I bet a few others already have.

Actually there has been quite a bit of BMW bashing in the past and sometimes (gasp) for good reason. I've owned a couple of BMWs, still have a few Porches, and have several GM products. I love my GM products also love the Porsches. I no longer have any BMWs because I prefer Porsche. "Boring cars with a flaccid chassis"? That's pretty funny considering their current performance offerings.

For the record I was the one who started getting personal, and I apologize.

I still think the point of both threads is being missed by the GM faithful.

Of course, this all supposes that all that is left at GM is "no talent hacks". Keep in mind that a lot of the folks who left, worked there for some time, and if they were any good, they left an impact on those folks still at GM.

GM's biggest problem was, and perhaps still is, all the beauracracy(sic?).

If you really want to take a long view, most large companies (whatever product they build) have up and down periods. Personally, I think it's some kind of crime against nature that Porsche is making money hand over fist building 4 door sedans and SUVs. Cadillac building/selling trucks? Also wrong.

amg_rx7 wrote: "It truly is the end of an era. Bob Lutz, the cocksure maverick who led a product renaissance at both General Motors and Chrysler, will retire effective May 1. When Lutz goes, the industry will lose one of its best car guys and a strong personality known as much for his gravelly pronouncements at auto shows as he was for the automobiles he helped create." "cockshure maverick" ??? Sounds like it was written by a Sarah Palin fan. I wonder if they can see Russia from their yard as well. On the other hand, some of the more recent cars from GM weren't overly terrible - the C6 Vette, G8, the more interesting Caddys.

"weren't overly terrible"? Give me a break. Many were/are class leaders. GM product is damn strong now. If they can align management/labor issues and get the clueless rubes to try a new GM product rather than endlessly referencing 25 year old heaps, they'll be fine.

So Bob comes in to a failing company to turn it around and 9 years later leaves after the bankruptcy and takeover by the Federal Government. Man, I think he needs a really good severance package for that. Hey, maybe he and that guy that almost destroyed Home Depot (and it being worth One Quarter Billion Dollars for Home Depot to fire him) before finally destroying Chrysler can get together and make a new car company.

I don't have a problem with Lutz retiring, dude IS 78 years old. If I doesn't retire now he would probably end up like Carroll Shelby hawking the latest snake oil.