I had a interesting thought this morning as I walked into work. As much as I absolutely hate that my two favorite brands, Oldsmobile and Pontiac are gone thanks to GMs grand ideas. The amazing vehicles they produced throughout the years that gave them that legendary status. As I don't agree to get rid of the two automotive legends, At the very least, a comforting thought l like to think of, is that they are not around anymore to witness what cars have become these days, which is nothing more than expensive appliances. Olds and Pontiac both lived in the prime time where cars meant something more to people than just transportation to point A to point B. Where people were excited when the new model year came out to see what changes have been made, and what was new. Where people wanted to go from point A to point B with some pizazz. Where people took their cars out of the garage, took the time on a Saturday morning and hand washed them in the driveway. Where Manufactures spent hours and hours designing these beautiful works of art. Through the century, cars had such class, and elegance. Of course even in the muscle car era, they were a blast to drive. They had these ridiculous hood scoops, outrageous stripes, and motors that could pull a freight train. Even my 84, even though it was plagued with 80s emissions, it still is one of the better looking cars that came from Detroit compared to everything else that on the road in the mid 80s. I walked into work this morning ( Ford dealership ) I looked around and everything was nothing but shapeless blobs painted silver. Instead of spending time on how the vehcile looks ( which dont get me wrong, some do look ok ) they spend all this time on the technological side, which in most cases is 50 / 50 on whether or not it works correctly. Most car brands out there, make every car look exactly alike. Instead of each car model being individually designed and thought out, they are now nothing more than big, medium and small versions of each other. Cadillac and Buick are getting to the point where you can't tell which one is which. Ford unfortunately is right behind by slowly morphing each vehicle with almost a very similar look to each other. If you can't roll up to a fuel station, and strike up a conversation with your fellow man about your car, then your doing it wrong.

 

I'm with you on that. Oldsmobile will live among the legends, not saddled with blind spot monitors (what the hell??) adaptive this and multifunction that.

Having said that, that Ford Fusion is a pretty darn nice car - looks awesome inside and out. Even the tech stuff is pretty cool. I like what Ford is doing these days. GM, not so much. Chrysler - nope. How many dorky 'crossovers' can one company produce side by side?

I'd better stop before I go on a rant....

 

Wow, while I love the cars of the past, the domestic car makers now are again making very good looking cars. I can't say the same for the foreign brands. It looks to me like Kia just copies everyone else, the new Toyotas and Hondas are ho-hum to me, but Chevrolet (and I hate to say it as I'm not a Chevy guy) has done a great job with styling starting with the Equinox and Camaro, and going to the Cruze, Malibu, and Impala. I never liked an Impala until I saw the 2014's. The new Stingray is amazing. I saw one on I-96 the other day, I don't like Corvettes as a rule, but this one is extremely sharp.

I'm also impressed with Ford's new cars (not Lincoln however, which I think all look like baleen whales).

 

Oh yeah. I will say Domestic cars have come light years from where they were just a couple years ago, just kinda sad how for an example the Cadillac ATS. CTS and XTS are very close in design and Buicks which are far worse, the Verano, Regal, and LaCross, unless parked side by side because of size, look so close you can't tell them apart.

 

I'm also impressed with Ford's new cars (not Lincoln however, which I think all look like baleen whales).[/QUOTE]

I will agree with you there, and a hilarious comparison haha.

 

IMHO the main reason why GM cut the Olds and the Pontiac line was because it was really no different than the rest of all the brands. Just as Ford cut Mercury, mostly the same cars different names with minor trim variations. This has been the problem with most American cars since the late 70's with a few minor brand loyal exceptions.

 

I think every generation of cars has had that said about the previous ones. I know some people love the g bodies, and that's fine, but collecting GM for me comes to a hard stop at the 72 model year and no further, until you get to a few ones in the 90s.

I wouldn't blame the car companies for the looks of cars today. They make what sells. No one wants to work on their cars anymore, but everyone wants retarded efficiency AND power, AND the EPA wants retarded emissions. So, things are computer controlled, and over accessorized. It's kind of like blaming Obama for the country's problems; should we blame him, or the people who elected him?

I work for a car company, and, although we make the #1 car in America in sales, a lot of people are uninspired by it. It's very practical, and it's a good car, yet it is not awesome looking. Whereas a lot of new flashy cars are horribly inpractical and hard to fit in and see out of, but they're FUN.

Things are different now. I rarely use AC, my daily driver has manual locks and windows and transmission, and I'm happy with a FM radio and occasionally a CD. People are so spoiled, my second cousin had never seen manual windows in 15 years of his life. But, that's what the customers want, so the auto companies must provide.

 

I agree, Most cars today have no "soul".
With a few exceptions, (Camaro, Mustang, etc.) they have all the "sex appeal" of a washing machine.

 

I humbly agree with Starfire on some of the new chevys. The cruze is a great car - rented one in SoCal and it is very well put together. The new impala is a looker too. The Camaro I always saw as a little over the top, much like a caricature of a camaro. Mustang is cool, Challenger is way cool. Also, IMHO the new durango could be the nicest looking SUV on the market. Definitely the nicest from Chrysler.

And those lincolns do look like that, don't they?

 

Surely the reason GM cut out Oldsmobile and Pontiac, and Ford dropped Mercury, as well as Chrysler closing down Plymouth is because those brands weren't selling enough to be viable.
Most good years for Olds or Pontiac were at the expense of Buick and Chevrolet, rather then eating into Ford or Mopar market share. Sure, the divisions would have good sales years, but GM didn't increase market share, in other words the divisions were fighting each other.
The domestic makers spent years with their heads in the sand, hoping the car buying public would buy the cars they wanted to make, Germany and Japan were much better at figuring out what people wanted to buy, and supplying the demand.
For 20 years or so the Big Three have been copying what Europe and the Far East have been selling, only very recently have they been trying to take the lead again.

American cars were almost unique in the developed world from post WW2 up to the '80s, no other country had a tradition of big cars with big lazy engines and a thirst to match across the board from entry level models to Cadillacs and Packards.
America had cheap fuel and its road infrastructure developed alongside the motor industry, European roads dated back the days when most people walked or the lucky ones rode on horseback, and we had to import all our oil.
Those days are gone, never to return I think.
To make a car that fits modern requirements every maker has had their hand forced to making similar cars that will conform to increasingly international safety, emissions and economy standards. A result of this is form following function and cars looking increasingly alike.
The winners will be the ones that run their factories efficiently and can adapt to changing trends. I think the term "Detroit Dinosaur" is very appropriate for the old full size cars of way back, enormously successful in their era, but died out when they couldn't adapt to a changing environment

Roger.

 

IMHO the auto industry has always gone through cycles. The 1930's were exciting years with evolving body styles and innovative engines coming to market. The 40's not so much. Then the 50's and 60's were explosive years with constant changes and upgrades along with the muscle car movement. Then the declines that came to American brands in the 70's & 80's as manufacturers struggled to adapt to the changing times. Then the 90's come along and Ford finds there is still life in the performance market with the 5.o Foxbody. As we turned into the new century manufacturers have increasingly stepped up the HP wars much like the muscle car wars of the 60's. For 2014 you can buy an Impala SS with a 415 hp LS 3; a Dodge Challenger or Charger with a 470 hp STR8 Hemi; How about a new 420 hp 5.0 Mustang or a 500hp Z 28 LE 1? Who would have thought in 1970, that in the year 2014 Cadillac would be making a 410 hp twin turbo XTS Coupe? I have not yet mentioned the ultimate American sports car the Chevrolet Corvette which in ZL 1 trim with a LS 9, sports 640 hp. By the way, you can up the anti with just about any of the cars above with the addition of a factory installed supercharger that increases hp to crazy levels on the street. These cars stop, corner and accelerate better than most cars prepped for Trans Am Racing back in the day. And by the way there is a thriving aftermarket for upgrades to the already good factory stock products. We old codgers love our muscle cars and are hung up in the 50's, 60's and 70's. I was around my 16 yr old nephew this weekend who is fixing up his 2000 Firebird. He was spouting of all the specs and statistics on the new Camaros, Mustangs, and other Detroit offerings. I could visualize him 40 years from now reading his Aug 2053 issue of Hemmings Muscle Machines and thinking man I wish they made cars like they did back in my day! The fire lives................