mustangman9494 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 i don,t care i hate gm and am downing a six of gloat over beer (pabst), when you,ve been at war with jerkoff chevy freaks for fifty years as i have been you just can,t help but sit back and enjoy the glow of watching rome burn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 F* JD Power ratings! Don't they do initial quality only?? If the TC, CV, GM, and Rangers boosted the ratings, then good I guess. But, to think, they have been in production for 20+ years off the same platforms they sure as hell better be built glitch-free. Taking the boats off the lots was a good move for Ford. "Hey come look at us. Our new cars don't have 10ft overhangs anymore." They are reliable cars, but they did little for Ford's image lately. Take all those old models JD power ratings away, and Ford would look poor as a company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Take all those old models JD power ratings away, and Ford would look poor as a company. Hardly. Vehicles like the Taurus, Fusion, and Mustang are also leading or near the top of their segments in reliability and initial quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 It wasn't so much GM vehicles being bland that have gotten them in this mess, it was just bad organization, poor reliability, and overall bad perception of the company. GM will go down in the history books for being a corporation that nose dived because of its mishandling. Luckily, Ford saw what was coming a few years back and it seems they are doing quite good. Even if they are not doing good it sure as hell seems like they are. They concentrated on ONE Ford. Getting the products that people want with, get this, RELIABILITY. I hear it quite often around the office about how so and so bought a Ford. They never would have considered an American auto maker but Consumer Reports lists the Fusion/Edge/Taurus/Escape with high marks. GM never woke up in time. Cars cost a lot of money and the internet allows us to research cars, magazine articles, read user reviews, etc. Ford has/had GM beat hands down in terms of reliability. Especially in the last 5 years. Plus, the company was organized like shit. I mean, why have an Escalade, Tahoe, and Yukon. Why even have a GMC? What's the point of Buick? Pontiac? Saturn you say? Hell, the American public had no idea had ownership of Suburu, Hummer (even), and SAAB. All crap if you ask me. Too complicated. ONE FORD makes a lot of sense. Ironically, the company I'm working for is preparing for a new Global Market and is also using ONE and consolidating their brands. BTW, has Mullaly written a book yet? Probably not, too busy leading Ford. :happy feet: I agree completely on the reliability. However, beyond the Malibu, G8, and CTS, what else is stylistically interesting at GM? (Don't say Vette since the current one is just a continuation of styling from 30 years ago). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 I agree completely on the reliability. However, beyond the Malibu, G8, and CTS, what else is stylistically interesting at GM? (Don't say Vette since the current one is just a continuation of styling from 30 years ago). I like the Sky and Solstice, and argue the Vette all you want. You have to count it or else exclude the Mustang from Ford. I'm also diggin on the Lambdas for the most part (there are just too many of them). The XLR, Aura, G6, Lucerne. None of these are really any more or less offensive than the offerings Ford currently has out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLaudioF150 Posted June 2, 2009 Author Share Posted June 2, 2009 I like the Sky and Solstice, and argue the Vette all you want. You have to count it or else exclude the Mustang from Ford. I'm also diggin on the Lambdas for the most part (there are just too many of them). The XLR, Aura, G6, Lucerne. None of these are really any more or less offensive than the offerings Ford currently has out. I agree with you 100%, but I'll also add the Sierra and Tahoe. They are nice vehicles for the most part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 I like the Sky and Solstice, and argue the Vette all you want. You have to count it or else exclude the Mustang from Ford. I'm also diggin on the Lambdas for the most part (there are just too many of them). The XLR, Aura, G6, Lucerne. None of these are really any more or less offensive than the offerings Ford currently has out. OK, I'll give you the Vette. I spent some time in a Lambda and was not impressed in the least. The current CTS is the only Cadillac that actually wears the Art and Science design well. I also don't care much for any of the others you mention. In my opinion, they're boring. But that's the thing I guess, it's an opinion based on personal preference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 I agree with you 100%, but I'll also add the Sierra and Tahoe. They are nice vehicles for the most part. Yes, neither of those are offensive in the least either. I really prefer the Tahoe over the Expedition in many trims. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 The Enclave, but for the grille and badge, is a nice car. If they just relabel it a Chevy it would sell better...Traverse is too dumbed-down. They, also, need diesel motors. They are pretty downright portly, but also inoffensive... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fusioneh Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Take all those old models JD power ratings away, and Ford would look poor as a company. Not really. I have my Fusion enrolled in True Dalta's survey, which is relatively long term, and most Ford models including the Edge Mustang Focus and 500/Taurus are doing at least as well as their competitors (both offshore and domestic). When you sign up a vehicle there they allow you to see reliability data for everything they have info on and it looks like Ford has made one H*ll of a comeback and it is really starting to pay off for them. Some of their info is really interesting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 (edited) GM just f'ed up keeping old car designs around for decades. The was no excuse to keep the W body floating for 22 years. The Impala is ancient and has that raspy motor sound like old Berettas. And they spent tons to bring out new '07 full size SUV's, which now only sell with huge rebates, eliminating the "$10K profit". Then the TrailBlazer 'sextuplets' [6 badge jobs!] became redundant. Did they think could offer unlimited versions of same SUV? Chevy, GMC, Olds, Buick, Isuzu, Saab all got a version. Edited June 2, 2009 by 630land Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustangman9494 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 i still pine for 87 gt mustangs even 79 mustangs i still work on em gotta love the fox platform who cares about gm they suck suck suck so glad they are in bankruptcy i hates em good riddance to bad garbage!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 (edited) It not the business model wants changing, they want to ditch their boring dull bland jellymould cars that made them bankrupt in the first place those lousy cars are a direct result of that business model. (guess Tom Servo said that already) Edited June 3, 2009 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 I like the Sky and Solstice, and argue the Vette all you want. You have to count it or else exclude the Mustang from Ford. I'm also diggin on the Lambdas for the most part (there are just too many of them). The XLR, Aura, G6, Lucerne. None of these are really any more or less offensive than the offerings Ford currently has out. Pete DeLorenzo, after dislocating his shoulder in an attempt to pat himself on the back, asserted that Rob't Lutz's 'product renaissance was 'too little, too late.' I argue not. I argue that GM not only assumed that 'product' would solve their cash problems, they also fundamentally misread the market. They don't have good processes for 1) developing good ideas and 2) qualifying those ideas with customer feedback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 Pete DeLorenzo, after dislocating his shoulder in an attempt to pat himself on the back, asserted that Rob't Lutz's 'product renaissance was 'too little, too late.' I argue not. I argue that GM not only assumed that 'product' would solve their cash problems, they also fundamentally misread the market. They don't have good processes for 1) developing good ideas and 2) qualifying those ideas with customer feedback. Well, their concept of "home run or nothing" sure didn't help matters. While many of their products are good, it seems that if it wasn't a smash hit, they would simply abandon it instead of improve what needed improving while keeping what works. That's the main difference I see product-wise between GM and the likes of Ford (now anyway), Toyota, and Honda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLaudioF150 Posted June 3, 2009 Author Share Posted June 3, 2009 (edited) Well, their concept of "home run or nothing" sure didn't help matters. While many of their products are good, it seems that if it wasn't a smash hit, they would simply abandon it instead of improve what needed improving while keeping what works. That's the main difference I see product-wise between GM and the likes of Ford (now anyway), Toyota, and Honda. Business as usual. I'm old enough and young enough to remember the video game console wars of the 90s and earlier this decade - when it was originally all about Nintendo and Sega. Then comes the newcomer that was changing it all, Sony. Sega developed interesting systems: The Sega Genesis CD, the 32X, Saturn (coincidence to GM?), and the Dreamcast (all flops for the most part) before finally yielding to Nintendo and Sony. They would just abandon their systems and 3rd party developers would as well. Another company that just didn't understand the market. GM is Sega. Sorry, back to automobiles. Edited June 3, 2009 by JLaudioF150 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 "We make the best cars in the world........ What the hell just happend? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 (edited) those lousy cars are a direct result of that business model. (guess Tom Servo said that already) Whats the business model called Richard? 'Death wish' we won't be selling any cars anymore in Europe plan, make sure you bore $h!t out of the buyer. Edited June 3, 2009 by Ford Jellymoulds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 "We make the best cars in the world........ What the hell just happend? Interesting that they're all wearing some combination of red, blue, and gray ties. Whats the business model called Richard? 'Death wish' we won't be selling any cars anymore in Europe plan, make sure you bore $h!t out of the buyer. This coming from the one that says Ford's euro lineup is boring? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 This one looks like he forgot his jacket on Picture Day and had to borrow the photographer's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 This one looks like he forgot his jacket on Picture Day and had to borrow the photographer's. Why do you say that, because it doesn't look like it fits well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 (edited) Why do you say that, because it doesn't look like it fits well? That, along with the goofy half-grin, poor posture, and the "cloud" backdrop just reminds me of Picture Day in elementary school for some reason. Edited June 3, 2009 by NickF1011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 That, along with the goofy half-grin, poor posture, and the "cloud" backdrop just reminds me of Picture Day in elementary school for some reason. Yeah, I thought the same thing about "picture day". The only one that seems to be happy is the third one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 Yeah, I thought the same thing about "picture day". The only one that seems to be happy is the third one. Reminds me of my sophomore year of high school when I wore a Guns N' Roses t-shirt on Picture Day. My mother was none too pleased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 Pete DeLorenzo, after dislocating his shoulder in an attempt to pat himself on the back, asserted that Rob't Lutz's 'product renaissance was 'too little, too late.' I argue not. I argue that GM not only assumed that 'product' would solve their cash problems, they also fundamentally misread the market. They don't have good processes for 1) developing good ideas and 2) qualifying those ideas with customer feedback. I sense Fritz Henderson is being typically GM and saying if we do X, Y and Z everything will work out OK. How can the same bunch of executives that didn't see the need for business change and restructuring be trusted to run the new GM properly? Fundamental change has to happen at GM and unless that is done, all of this is for nothing.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.