Lutz Speech on Design
Text of a Lutz speech at the Pratt Institute on examples of lackluster car design and great car design, what makes a good automotive designer, and on thinking outside of the box.
Thank you, Dr. Schutte, and good afternoon, everyone.
It’s a pleasure for me to be here with you today in this fabulous setting. It’s hard to imagine NOT being inspired to do great creative work on this beautiful campus. How can you think about anything but great design when every time you turn around you see the Brooklyn Bridge?
I asked the organizers what they’d like me to talk about today, and they said, “Anything you want would be fine.”
So I said, “Great. How about 20 minutes on cigars, gin and military technology?”
And they said, “well … okay … fine. But can you work ‘design’ in there anywhere?”
Lucky for them, design happens to be another one of my passions that I’m prepared to talk about at the drop of a hat.
In fact, I’m so enamored with it that I’ll skip the other passions and just talk about design. And I’ll offer up some survival tips for later when you put your design talents to work.
What I’d like to talk about, specifically, is what I think constitutes good automotive design and what makes a good designer. Not being a designer myself, I feel uniquely qualified to comment!
No other product in the world has the ability to inspire passion quite like the automobile. And passion can be generated from different aspects of a vehicle. A terrific powertrain with a growling, throaty exhaust tone can inspire passion. Superb vehicle dynamics, great cornering, good road manners – those can all appeal to someone’s passion for driving.
But what really communicates passion in a vehicle is design. Particularly exterior design … which makes the initial emotional connection with potential customers. Interior design is extremely important too, but if the exterior design fails, the interior doesn’t matter, because most people won’t get close enough to see what the inside looks like.
So what makes good design? Well, it’s more than just “looking pretty.” The physical appearance of a vehicle speaks volumes to the viewer about its brand, its heritage, and about its real or implied characteristics.
A required starting point is basic proportion: Are the length/height/width relationships such that an elegant vehicle can be created? Does the vehicle exude strength, grace, stability or whatever is desired?
Here are some vital cues that, if missed, and they frequently are, can doom a vehicle to lackluster design.
The first sin is what’s known as “lateral overhang,” when the body appears to be too wide for the tread width. It’s a fatal flaw and one that even gorgeously shaped sheet metal can’t overcome.
A good design starts with the right sheet metal to tread relationship. The body should look like it was stretched tautly over the chassis.
Tumble-home is the angle of glass from the beltline to the roof as viewed from the front or the rear of the vehicle.
Another organizing principle is that the look of dynamism and stability is hugely enhanced by tumble-home. Here, especially if we are prisoners of a relatively narrow platform, there is frequently pressure to achieve maximum package by increasing shoulder width and lateral headroom.
While everything must be an intelligent compromise, I believe that creating a slab-sided, non-tumble-home car to achieve maximum package is a road to disaster. People will never get close enough to an ungainly, static-looking vehicle to experience how great the package really is!
I’d like to take a moment now to share with you what are some of my all-time favorite automotive designs, and why.
- Alfa Romeo
- 1941 Lincoln Continental
- 1963 Corvette split window
- 1961 Jaguar E-Type
- 1957 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham
What these designs all share is the unquestioned ability to inspire passion, to make an immediate emotional connection with anyone who looks at them.
That passion is the result of hard work and creativity. What it is NOT the result of is another thing that these vehicles have in common: None of them were created by focus groups.
It’s very important to remember that, as designers, you have to create on your own terms. Not someone else’s. Especially not someone with a margin of error plus or minus three percent.
You have to come up with the “big idea.” In other words, the big idea has to come from Steven Spielberg, not from the tabulated replies of thousands of moviegoers pouring out of theaters.
The creative process is not, nor will it ever be, “scientific.” You cannot start with quantitative research to find the “big idea.” Whether it’s cars or movies or clothes, a company needs inspired, free-ranging discussion among its top creative people.
Once an idea has attained its physical shape, then you do your research. And those who ignore the results of research at that point do so at their own peril. Too often, we creative people have a dangerous tendency to “talk to ourselves.” We need the counterbalance of research.
So now that we know what great design is and where it comes from, what about great designers? Where do they come from, besides Pratt?
Well, great designers are born, then they’re trained. They learn their rendering techniques and develop a sense of taste that they didn’t have before.
The really great designers have to be much more than just the ones who draw the prettiest pictures, a/k/a “hot pencils.” They have to be great leaders, great managers, great salespeople, great communicators, and great diplomats.
It’s a complicated profession.
I don’t think people realize how interlocking the process is and how many tradeoffs are necessary. Designing a great car is about fulfilling cost, safety, manufacturing, and space and comfort objectives … a whole host of requirements.
What makes the really good designer is being able to get the best-looking car for the company under often hugely conflicting sets of conditions. Sometimes it’s simply the person who is able to fight the hardest to force other people to make compromises.
The master designer is a good salesperson who can interact effectively with colleagues in sales and senior management.
A great designer is a good leader and manager. Because in a large automobile company you just can’t do it all yourself. A lot of it has to be delegated. The design heads of large companies seldom if ever take pencil to paper, unless it’s to correct somebody else’s renderings.
Now, if you put all that together, you’ve got a great designer, but it still doesn’t mean you get great designs. The last piece of the puzzle is direction from senior leadership.
I realize there isn’t much you can do about that… but it’s essential nonetheless.
The best example of that is the Chrysler design community from the time of the horrible boxy Imperials, Fifth Avenues, and LeBarons with the padded vinyl roofs and the opera windows. We went from those to the LH cars with essentially the same design team. What changed was what senior management was asking for.
You can’t expect anything more out of the designers than what the direction of management gives them, because they can’t operate in a vacuum.
The best way to ensure solid direction from senior management, of course, is to become a part of it. But you have to survive and stick it out a long time to reach that goal.
I’d like to give you a couple of things to keep in mind as you try to get there … two little phrases I’ve come to live by. The first is “Sez Who?” And the second is “Often wrong, but seldom in doubt.”
They both mean… stand up for your convictions. If you don’t have any convictions, get some. Then, stand up for ‘em.
Don’t be afraid to question conventional wisdom. Don’t settle for, “Because that’s the way we always do it.” Don’t be afraid to propose a radical idea. Don’t be afraid to take a different approach. Redesign the program, and wait for other people to catch up to you. Don’t spend your career catching up to everyone else.
Corporate America is plagued by “groupthink.” No one wants to be the first to disagree, so everyone agrees that whatever it is can’t be done. No one wants to rock the boat. We need more “integrative thinkers” who think outside the box, who come up with new ways of doing things.
At GM, our goal is to move beyond the artificial limitations imposed by the “process” and use people’s intellect, creativity and passion for vehicles that are truly beautiful and desirable. We are trying to encourage the boat rockers.
Now, I’m not endorsing anarchy or armed revolution. Once the debate is over and the decision is made, we need to enable it. We will never make progress if people circumvent or undermine decisions.
In my opinion, disruptive people are an asset. But that’s just to a point. It’s like anything else in life; you have to strike a balance. You have to know when to push back, how to push back, and when to retreat to fight another day.
For some of you, the balance will be instinctive. Others will have to learn by making mistakes. You owe it to the company to be somewhat disruptive, and to criticize and suggest improvements. But on the other hand, you also have to know where to stop.
There’s a fine line, and if you’re on the good side of the line, you’re a grain of sand that helps produce the pearl in the oyster. Pearls are produced by irritants such as an errant grain of sand, after all. But if you go too far, you’re a great big pebble that the oyster spits out. So strike a balance.
If you are one of those people, and you’re a great designer to boot, we can use you at GM. Design has ascended to a new level of importance and awareness at GM, and it’s a fun place to be right now.
In fact, there’s been a long relationship between Pratt and GM. Many of your distinguished alumni have contributed mightily to GM, including John Cafaro, who is here today. John played a big role in the design of the current Chevy Corvette, among other vehicles.
He can tell you about the new and exciting cars and trucks coming down the pike from GM. We are going to change people’s perceptions about the company, and change them significantly.
Let’s take a look at a few things we’ve done recently, beginning with a couple of concept cars that garnered a lot of attention.
And some of our recent production cars …
I hope you can see that we’re serious about what we’re doing and where we’re going. GM is going to be the team to beat in this business.
I’d like to wrap up today with a final thought about integrative thinking, in the form of a story about fleas.
Yes, you heard me right: fleas.
Flea trainers have observed a predictable and strange habit of fleas. They train fleas by putting them in a cardboard box with a lid on it. The fleas will jump up and hit the top of the box over and over and over again. It gives them a terrible headache!
When you take off the lid, the fleas continue to jump, but they will not jump out of the box. They won’t jump out because they can’t jump out. Why? The reason is simple. They have conditioned themselves to jump as high as the lid of the box. And once they’ve taught themselves to jump just so high, that’s all they can do!
Well, the same thing happens to people. They restrict themselves and never reach their potential. Just like the fleas, they fail to go any higher, thinking they’re already doing all they can do.
We have to condition ourselves to jump out of the box. And you are at the perfect time in your careers to start doing that – the beginning. Heck, you haven’t even started yet!
Now is the time for you to program yourselves to jump out of the box. By unlocking your creative potential and questioning traditional thinking – wherever you deem it appropriate to do so – you will build a solid foundation for success.
I hope that success comes at General Motors, selfishly, but wherever it comes, I wish you nothing but the best.
Thank you for your kind attention. I’d be happy to take any questions you might have now.
Remarks by Robert A. Lutz
President’s Lecture Series
Pratt Institute
Brooklyn, New York
April 9, 2003
65 Comments
Leave a Reply
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
Bob said:
“But what really communicates passion in a vehicle is design… Interior design is extremely important too, but if the exterior design fails the interior doesn’t matter…”
Yes, and if the interior falls flat, the exterior doesn’t matter!
So many of GM’s interior designs fall flat because of cheap materials and clumsy looking dashboards. That’s one reason I wouldn’t buy one of your sedans!! The G6 looks great on the outside, but please Bob…take another look at your new G6 dashboard and compare it to an Accord’s …which one looks more elegant and applealing?…look at the graceful lines of an Acura TL interior…I’ve been waiting for 20 years for GM to figure this out…what’s up???
I’ve been scrutinizing GM interiors lately and here are my impressions:
1) Buick: Lacrosse appears to be a tremendous improvement in fit and finish. It is still, however, a boring dashboard and interior design and a notch below its Lexus competition in terms of feature content.
2) Cadillac: Had a CTS overnight. It drove beautifully but the interior materials were plasticky and felt a price-class below my Saab 9-5. At least the designers tooks risks; unfortunately, they were the wrong ones.
The STS interior appears to be a step up from the CTS. It is still compromised by large monolithic expanses of tacky black plastic (in the center stack, for example). Hard to ignore in a car in this price range.
3) All GM vehicles: The parts-bin control stalks are, quite simply, awful. The material is cheap, the graphic design on them retrograde, and they ‘feel’ low-budget. Please refer to VW or even Honda.
Having said all that, I like where GM is going. They’re just not up to world-class, let alone world-beating, in an area of the vehicle that is extremely important to me and my family.
Last year, I voted with my dollars: Acura MDX over the Cadillac SRX. A better interior in the SRX would have reversed that decision–overriding both the MDX’s established and bullet proof reputation for reliability and its lower price.
Mr. Lutz: Thanks for opening a channel of communication with the public.
Perhaps my age is showing, but the problem I have with most current auto designers is that they locate the beltline too high on passenger cars. It is no longer possible to comfortably rest your arm on the window sill of most cars when driving in nice weather. Thank goodness they haven’t done that with most trucks or SUV’s yet. Today’s designers also tend to squash the rooflines so you peer out of what looks like a series of slits instead of windows (DCX is the worst offender). Ugly and disproportionate styling in my book, but it seems to sell.
Thanks for sharing your favorite designs. My favorite GM designs include the 1955/57 and 1962 Chevys and 1961/62 and 1963/67 Corvettes. I also loved the lines of 1961/62 Pontiacs. Those cars, particularly the hardtops, convertibles and roadsters, had personality and class in comparison to today’s ho-hum sedan designs like Impala and GTO.
I would like to see one new catagory added to this Blog: Quality. I know that J D Powers reports show quality is up but if you look over the long term at Consumer Reports, American cars still are behind – even Cadillac which amazes me. I finally gave up and bought a Subaru after terrible problems with two GM cars: A Saturn and Olds. They were bought with the intent of saving money while my sons attended college and instead, I had to replace both of them. I look at the new Saturn Sky and it looks terrific but I wonder if it will hold up. With Honda, Toyota, Nissan or Subaru that’s not even a question. I was born and raised in Detroit and bummed that after 35 years it remains a big factor for many many buyers.
Fleas: Jump Higher
Bob Lutz has posted a talk to designers at Pratt Institute in 2003 on his new blog. Lots of interesting material for anyone passionate about design. Perhaps the most interesting anecdote is the story of fleas conditioning themselves to self-limit
Mr. Lutz,
I am a seasoned advertising manager (NOT for GM), and it appears as though the only way GM can reverse this shocking share / sales slide is through ADVERTISING. During the Bush / Kerry campaigns, I don’t think anyone doubts that Kerry was a supremely intelligent man, however, due to a STRONG media budget in conjuction with a staggering Bush messaging strategy, Bush won. WHY??? He spent money to be ON TV. I see more Nissan, Honda, Hyundai, Toyota ads than I do Pontiac. Why is that? I dare you to look at a share of voice analysis, and understand that GM is not the sum of it’s parts anymore. You can’t say, “well, GM spends over $1 billion advertising” – - You are being horribly outspent by your competition. Turn on the TV…The buying consumer does not care and may not even realize that Pontiac is a GM product. Frankly, I doubt anyone even understands the changes going on at Pontiac. Nissan spent well over $700 million dollars last year advertising their product. Pontiac spent just under $200 million. You do the math. GM probably spends somewhere around $4,250 per unit on consumer incentives. If you were to scale back the “cash back” by $500, on 300,000 projected sales, that would free up over $150 million that you could use to promote the Pontiac product renaissance. I’ve got news for you, the car buyers ignoring your Pontiac products aren’t doing so because of price…they simply haven’t been given a good reason to shop Pontiac…or don’t KNOW about the good reasons to shop Pontiac. Challenge your organization to expand their marketing insights BEYOND “cash back” and ask them to do their homework. You’re the KING…Detroit believes in you, this can be fixed. If Hyundai can reverse their fortunes with a questionable product…so can GM. Look at their advertising budget. Eveyone is outspending Pontiac / GMC / Cadillac. I can provide you a greater / more in depth analysis of media spending, but I know you have qualified professionals on staff to do just this. You can fix this. Bravo on the G6 Coupe / Convertible. Next step…promote them effectively. Be a media pig. That is what can make you great again. Thank you.
Mr.Lutz
I really like the Caddy Sixteen , heres an idea for you, shrink it a little and turn it into the next Deville, the 68-70 Eldorado influence in it is beautiful and would make for a gorgeous car,build a coupe too and bring back the eldo while you are at it . This car would make Bill Mitchell proud .
Hi Mr. Lutz,
I came from a GM family of sorts. When I was little, my dad had a 55 Olds. He bought, and kept until he died (in 1993) a 1964 Pontiac Grand Prix. He also bought a slightly used ‘69 GTO (that later became my first car),a Buick Rivera, and a Caddy Sedan DeVille. But after that GTO, I have not owned a GM car since. But, of late I have been tempted. I’m waiting for some improvements to the CTS-V interior and to that god-aweful rear end (might as well add fins to it, it couldn’t hurt it any more than it is), or better handling in the GTO. BTW, the GTO interior is quite nice. I like the color gauge treatment.
I also like the Solstice concept car (too bad its heavier than my Miata, which BTW, I think of as one of those those classic designs). Your getting very close these days. Keep pushing.
I just bought a 2005 trailblazer BEAUTIFUL vehicle except 3 things.1- I cant believe this car didn’t come with XM radio.2-The center console does not allow you to view the labels on the cd’s when they are in there .3-The “white” dashboard looks kinda cheap. These are 3 minor complaints, I love the vehicle and will continue to buy GM.p.s.I also wish all good Americans out there to buy GM or at least patronize an American car company- we need to get OUR economy back on track- not thiers!
Just looked at the design concepts from the auto show, if GM models are going to look like the GMC Graphyte concept, I may have to keep my 95 Yukon around till I die.
The Graphyte, it’s Chev & Pontiac sisters, the Ford model, seldom have I seen such ugly vehicles — with the exception of some coming from the former East Germany or early South Korean designs.
If American automakers think that designing “Ugly” is going to help them sell autos, we’re doomed!
Look at the inside of a new Mustang. What does GM have to offer that competes with this car … nothing except the Cobalt. There have been many pictures pop up in forums about a new Camaro coming from GM. If GM wants to focus on cars then I say do it but do it with some enthusiasm. Build a car that is GM, that brings back some of what GM was and that has where they are going in it. The new Mustang does this for Ford. It’s a sad day for us diehard Chevy fans to have to walk into the Ford dealer and put a down paymnet on a new Mustang. I would rather be buying a new Camaro.
Regarding design… with all respect, the GTO is no more a GTO than the man in the moon. You guys have really nailed the horsepower, but design?
I have only owned GM products for many years… this is the first time I am considering expiring my lease on a Chevrolet, to look at the Mustang or the Charger. If GM would just put a little nostalgia into their products, you’d slay the competition.
You did good with the SSR, how could you miss so horribly with the goat. The least you could have done is called it the really really fast Grand am, at least you wouldn’t have hurt anyones feelings. Keep up the o.k. work.
Mr. Lutz, you stated, “I hope you can see that we’re serious about what we’re doing and where we’re going. GM is going to be the team to beat in this business.”
So my question is about Retro-styling. I don’t have exact numbers on the Corvette Vs. Camaro sales and I’m really partial to Camaros, as I have owned a few and own a 68 right now. With the “new” Mustang out, a lot of buyers would really like to see a “new” Camaro. Personally I like Kris Horton’s rendering, which was received very well. The only “sports car” in my eyes is the Corvette, which is out of reach of a lot of buyers and is not too practical with only two seats, even if the Camaro’s rear seating was not the most useful.
Mr. Lutz,
In your speech you say “I hope you can see that we’re serious about what we’re doing and where we’re going.” And you reference the GTO. I think the GTO is a fairly boring design, looking like a rental car, frankly. I’m also very disappointed in the design of the new Impala, which looks like a Lumina on the front end and a Ford Taurus on the back end. Nothing that will beat the Japanese in these vehicles. I am also surprised that GM cannot produce a minivan to rival the Honda Odyssey. The new GM vans look someone did a nosejob on the old vans.
I hope GM’s other cars, including the Sky and Solctice, are better.
Bruno Pigott
I would love to understand what it is that is so hard to put into words about the design differences between German, Japanese, and American cars. Essentially, it seems to me, that the Germans are about quality and performance at a high cost, the Japanese are trying to approach that level but are still more along the lines of reliability at a lower cost, and American car companies fall short on both!
Why?
Mr. Lutz,
It’s great that you want to know what we think!
I’m 59,a race enthusiast and drive a Mercury Grand Marquis which I paid $50.00 to drive around Road America last Summer.
I think convincing people that you are giving them the best you can is very important. If they think you are holding back, they tend to look at your offering unfavorably.
I think this will be a great boost to the new Mustang Sales. Most magazines say something about how amazing it is to get 300 Hp under 25,000 with great handling ,good looks,great interior,brakes,etc. Give America your best, don’t put out a better car for Europe and tell us we can’t have it(Ford is often guilty of this).
I love what’s happening at Cadillac. I saw the Caddy’s race at Road America as well as the 2 yellow Corvettes in the ALMS. That gets my atention.
The Mercury Marquis is a great value because it is extremely well adapted to the actual driving I do. It’s got good power, smooth and quiet,good room, good ride. It’s well adapted to actual American driving conditions and at a good price.I like rear wheel drive. At Road America I was able to out corner all the front drives. The Marquis is fun to drive. I will step up to one of your Caddy’s when business conditions permit.
American cars can and should be the best. Give people your best and they will support you!
Joe Deegan
I love the concept of this blog and the ability to provide feed back, as well as knowing that it does not fall on deaf ears.
That being said, I would like to give my 2 cents. I love the direction GM is going under Mr. Lutz’s command, however, being an auto enthusiast and a graphic designer, I do have some gripes about GMs automotive offerings.
Looking at this article you mention such classic cars as the Continental, the E-type, and the Eldorado… then mention such abominations as the H2 and SSR.
Those classics you mentioned are classics for a reason. They are monuments to automotive design and development. Created during times where the beauty of the design was more important that what nazi bean counters had to say. The H2 is a monument to arrogance, excess, and soccer moms, as the SSR is the spokesmodel for cost cutting, and 16yr old girls everywhere. The SSR could have been a much bigger hit with a real engine such as an LS1 or LS6. Yes the cost would have been higher, but that doesnt matter. People arent affraid to spend money. Look at the H2. Its an expensive toy that should NEVER be taken off a paved road or else suffer from snapped suspension pieces as some videos online have shown in great hilarity.
However, people still buy it because people want it. Everyone likes toys. And they like expensive toys even more because they like to show off the image of success.
This is the direction I have seen cars going these days. No one makes beautiful cars anymore except the true design nameplates, Ferrari, Aston Martin, Alfa Romeo, etc. However, a car does not have to be expensive to be beautiful or a solid performer.
The part where GM fails in design mostly is the interior. However, thats starting to change, thanks to the bigger partnership with Holden. GM “had” a hit with the Monaro/GTO until GM USA got a hold of it and molested the design to make it more sedate for the US market, and put a Pontiac/GTO badge on it. Holden already did the leg work for the design and had a winner. Why GM had to go waste money and re-invent the wheel on that one is a question for the ages i guess. I have friends who bought a GTO and have invested more time and money into importing the Australian cosmetics for it because its a better design.
A successful design is not bothered by pleasing the masses. A successful design is always love/hate. Mediocrity is not something to strive for. Save that for the masses who just need something to get from A to B. Give the rest of us who love cars for their lines and not their gas milage something better.
Mr. Lutz – Coming from a family of GM owners in the 50’s & 60’s where design (interior and exterior) reigned and I looked forward to every September to see what the new year would bring, I must now say that design has lost its way. I loved what you did at Chrysler and I wish you the best at GM and you can do the same thing here if you will produce more of the concept cars and make the production cars look like the concept. The LaCrosse is an example of what not to do. The 2000 concept was beautiful and the production car is boring and doesn’t look anything like the concept car. At Chrysler, many of your concept cars made it to production and were great successes. My wife says that most of the cars today, look like “Jelly Beans”. Be bold and quit making “Jelly Bean” design cars that all look the same. You have made great strides in quality but it isn’t enough. I like what I see in the Cadillac division and the new Saturn Sky, now take it to the other divisions. I know that product design elements (mainly via the grill) are important to the industry but most people don’t care so don’t feel you must have every Chevy have a horizontal bar in the grill, every Buick an oval grill, etc. break free of your design anchors. I want to see GM reign superior again. I wish you all the best!
Bob Lutz on Design
This is a man who truly knows what he’s talking about. Copy of a speech he gave on car design….
Mr. Lutz,
I don’t know if this is the place, but I’m concerned about the fate of the SAAB. I’ve read that you’re thinking of killing it. If ever there were a car that stood for Design and Innovation, it was SAAB. Just as you’ve stated, under poor leadership, comes poor design. The face of SAAB has struggled since the GM purchase. I own a 9-5 (that my wife drives), but I drive a 1989 900. It’s a far better looking car (granted, it’s a convertible, but it’s a prettier car regardless).
I hope you’ll give the SAAB designers the freedom you espouse, with the thoughtful guidance necessary from the top. Sure SAAB needed an SUV to compete, but did they need a rebadged Chevy Trailblazer? Yuk. That’s not going to fool a SAAB driver. Why would I want that?
“Hey, how do you like my SAAB truck?”
“It looks like my Chevy.”
“Well, they put the key in the console. It’s a SAAB.”
“Uh huh…Sure.”
All you need do is look to the fit and finish, the design of pre GM SAAB, and return to those principles WHILE spending money to advertise the product (something I rarely see since the ill fated Find Your Own Road campagain), and maybe it wouldnt’ be a dead line of vehicles for you.
Thank you.
Jim Holm
A number of people here have pointed out GM’s deficiencies in interior materials. I have noticed some of that (though, in fairness, the materials are long-lasting). My experience with recent GM products, however, has been marred more by interior *function*. ¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†
1) Headlights automatically turn on at night, even when the switch is “off” rather than “auto”. Apparently no one at GM has ever driven in a pea-soupy fog.¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†
2) Pop in a cassette adapter to play my mp3 player through the car stereo, and the tape spits back out while the display reads “broken tape.” I cannot imagine any situation where such a feature is useful. (The tape is *already* ruined by the time you detect it.) ¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†
3) Climate control has a mind of its own. Take a cue from Volvo here; they use a simple knob labeled with the set temperature.                  
4) Dashboard control for the cabin light is not backlit. How, then, can I find it?                   
5) Seat adjustment motor is glacially slow. So I stand in the rain while the seat moves back from my wife’s position enough for me to get in. ¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†
But the worst functional annoyance (except, of course, for BMW’s iDrive, which is in a class by itself) has to go to a Ford, who for years had the habit of labeling speedometers with the illogical sequence 5, 15, 25, 35,… as if posted speed limits were the only reason for checking your speed.
Mr. Lutz,
Congratulations on having the courage to put your thoughts out in public and the comments and critique in response to them. The internet is an excellent way to bypass sycophant VP’s who hang their careers on telling the boss what he wants to hear.
I have been a strictly GM owner for the past 20 years, after having a few other brands, and your products have, for the most part, served well. I have noted a few things with design which I feel may be affecting GM’s market share.
The interior discussion is a good one to raise, perhaps your designers feel that because they went to Pratt (or some other art deco design house) that they must “make a statement” and “be different” with their designs. Perhaps this was the reason GM unleashed their Edsels (the Aztek, the “Taurus eater” Caprice, and others). Someone needs to be clued in that market share is the judge of a successful design.
As a product design consultant who also happens to have an Electrical Engineering degree and more than a few patents, I often see the results of designers who do not understand the guts of what goes into their products, nor how their products are used, just an artsy portfolio with exaggerated cartoonish swoops and swirls… can it be built? will it endure? who cares, it’s catchy in the world of the non-technical designer. (You can spot them as you walk down the hall, they will be wearing black turtlenecks and have impossibly thin titanium-framed glasses). Send them off to work under an Engineering group and then on the road with test drivers before you let them near their electronic canvasses again.
Case in point: the dash.
I know GM can make a decent dashboard because it exists in my 1999 Blazer. Clean, simple, readable analog speedo, tach & a few gauges. It’s perfect and does not appear cheap. Look at the dash of any mid-90’s BMW, same deal – and who would argue that BMW does not engineer the best cockpits in the world?
Why then does GM not take the best and copy it? Is it a question of pride? Is it designers running amok? Is it the bean-counters? Is it marketing? Somebody, somewhere in GM has decided to ignore a solid readable instrument panel and go off in random directions. Don’t feel bad though, others are equally misguided (the 2005 Mustang, with it’s gorgeous exterior is marred by bringing back the unreadable gauges of the 60’s – it’s form over function and it’s just wrong)
Instead of investing the resources in dozens of different oddball instrument clusters, why not take a few and improve their perceived quality? Take your design head and make him (or her) sit in a BMW all day and play and endless tape – “this is what a dash should look like, this is what a dash should look like…” if they don’t get it, fire them and let them wreck some other company.
Exteriors are another area where I have to ask who is in charge at GM design – the new Corvette looks suspiciously like a 10 year old Mitsubishi 3000GT – go compare the front ends and beady eyes, is that the ‘vette designer’s dream car? A decade old VR4? Fire him (or her) and get someone who understands that the exterior must lead design (while the interior should be a competent cockpit, and if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it)
Hope you don’t mind the harsh critique, but as mentioned I am (and would like to remain) a loyal GM customer, it’s just I know you guys can do better.
One more thing – send some of your Engineers & Designers out on the auto-show circuit – the marketing flacks that currently accompany the cars aren’t much interested in listening to customer comments – big missed opportunity (and a chance to build some great equity with the customer)
Ah, make that two more things – be thankful the “seasoned advertising manager” doesn’t work for you – better products = better sales, not advertising the daylights out of junk, advertising has it’s place to be sure, but it is hardly a panacea. Build the better car and they will come.
Good Luck,
Craig
I don’t like amber turn signal lamps on the rear of vehicles. Amber does not enhance to apperarance of the rear of any vehicle, amber is hard to notice when brake lights are on, and it seems to me GM is trying to copy imports. I believe most auto buyers fall into one of two groups. One group are loyal to american made vehicles and the other group buy anything but american made. Having said that, the last thing that I want is my car to look like an import.
To everybody in upper management at GM, Ford and Chrysler, please do not take this the wrong way. I am on your side, I hope that my comments help you. If I were sitting in a room with you and you asked me to speak freely, I would still say exactly what I am saying in the following rant. Of course I do not undersatnd all the aspects of your business and I am not implying that I could do your job better than you can.
Part of the issue here is that most of the managment of these US Car Companies companies are not “car nuts”. Perhaps they were when they started, but they are not now. Now, cars are just their job, and they want to just get their job done and get through the week. Perhaps I would feel the same way also if I worked there. Please do not take offense. The fact that the top managers get company cars, or are required to drive cars from their own company is bad thing. Please, you Top Dogs need to go to a Ford, GM or Chrysler Dealer, and buy a car with your own money just like everybodyy else. Suffer through the tacky cheezy nonsense at the dealer and then live with the mid level car with poor driving characteristics and lousy seats/interior for 2 years. Then go to a Honda/Toyota/Subaru/VW/BMW/Lexus Dealer and buy a car with your own money. The satisfaction of BUYING and OWNING a GM, Ford or Chrysler product, especially the Sedans, does not come even close to the other brands. Sorry, somebody needs to say this to you. Mr. Lutz, I am sure that you know what I am talking about and trying hard at GM to change things for the better.
Spend a little bit more on the interior so that the console does not wobble when I lean on it. Please stop buying your interior parts from Rubbermade. Perhaps if you paid your suppliers a little better, they could buy better tooling and your interiors would come up to snuff. If the Germans and French can do this, certainly we can. Our costs are much lower to begn with here in the USA.
Please, all of you in Detroit involved in designing cars, get out a little. Go to some other towns, other countries and rent some cars. Go for a drive. Look at some old buildings and the furniture in some nice hotels and restaurants. Go to Japan or France and ride on the trains. Go to Germany, drink a few beers and eat dinner in Cologne, and then drive to Munich the next morning in a rented German or French car. Drive from Munich to Bologna; look at the mountains, look at all the different CARS!!!! There is more to life than Alias and Clay all day, driving home up Mound in your 9-5 and then eating at Outback. I think that senior management should pay for trips, something like field trips, for all Designers!!! What do you think Mr. Lutz?
I am not trying to sound like a snob. I just think that in order to compete with the Europeans on Design, we need to get our butts in gear; especailly for the interiors As for driving feel, well that is going to be tough. Japanese cars beat us just slightly for relaibility and gadgets, but the real difference are the dealers. Japanese cars are becoming more and more UGLY, and the interior quality is starting to look worse than the Domestic cars, so no worries there.
Good luck, keep up the improvments!
Dear GM,
Please, please, please….
Make an effort to improve the ineriors.
Large powerful cars shold be RWD or AWD based on RWD platforms.
Take away the company cars. IF you must, give the managment an allowance to lease or buy a car. Require them to go to a real dealer. Make them buy a GM car first, then the following car, they must by a competitor’s product. This will help them realize what they are up against.
Get rid of dealers that do not improve. Get rid of GM dealers that also sell Kia or Hyundai. GM Only.Clean the places up. Go look at a Saab Dealer or BMW. Nice places…
Give the car Designers an allowance and require them to go on a field trip to Europe and Japan. Make them rent cars in Europe and drive around observing. This will help as all they see now are GM cars and rentals from Avis and National.
Enforce a strict dress code at GM Design Staff.
Cupholders are important in Minvans. Driving feel and ergonomics are important in Sedans.
Bring Opel and Holden cars here they way they are. They will sell better than Saab and Saturn; trust me.
Bring back Oldsmobile.
Stop with the Tiger Woods Buick nonsense. He is too young to drive a Buick and I am sure that it is the last car he would choose if he were not paid to drive one.
The Led Zeppelin Caddy thing is just as bad. Get real.
Remember, you cannot polish a turd; hence the huge discounts and low residual values.
Good luck!
Dear Bob Lutz -
I am an auto enthusiast and fashion maven and recognize the power of popular culture and brands and see a current trend on where there are unique partnerships are being formed and products created driven by fashion. There has been a revolution in the shoe category when popular designers like Jill Sander will reconstruct a Puma shoe and sell it for a super premium price and bring new cache, distribution channels and sex appeal to Puma. It is happening in a lot of categories like consumer electronics, clothing, luxury goods, etc. I know Sean “P Diddy” Combs has created a lot of buzz and interest from a dealership and consumer level by customizing a Lincoln Navigator and making it a Sean John Navigator. I am impressed in his ability to leverage the power of his brand and celebrity to crack into a brand new category and create something very classy and tasteful.
How long will it be before GM and other car manufactures partner with brands like Sean John or Marc Jacobs to contemporize their brand and bring a new level of cache and buzz factor to their product lines?
In my opinion it is an untapped area that you could take ownership in and create a new paradigm in the automotive category.
I would be very interested to hear you POV on this topic and if you see the trend transcending to the auto category.
I recently bought a Nissan Murano. For $30K I got excellent fit and finish, a beautiful dash and a practical car. While HP and tourque are objective, design is SUBjective and I love the way my car looks. Apparently, from the ever-increasing #s of Muranos on the road, I am not alone.
Mr. Lutz: My question and my challenge is this: buy one of these and let your design team members take it home for the week. The ergonomics are great and the fit and finish rivals Caddy or Lincoln… the alleged benchmarks of American cars. Compare a LaCrosse with an Altima, Accord or Maxima. Close but not quite there. Close should not be acceptable. Please do better, and I’ll spend my $30K on a Pontiac or Buick next time around.
Please read these posts and realize that we Americans are pulling for you, and hoping that you succeed.
I was in the market for a new mid sized car in late fall. I very much wanted to buy an American car. I thought the new Chevy Malibu might just be it. I rented one and liked all the mechanical stuff very much, the power, the handling the mileage but what totally turned me off and lost the sale to a Honda Accord was the seats. The seats felt cheap, uncomfortable and unworthy of the car. I couldn’t imagine spending several hours driving in it. A little more care and a few bucks and GM would ahve reclaimed a customer. it is that lack of attention to all the details that has unfortunately put the American car vendors where you are.
Mr. Lutz,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. My focus is on the GTO. In 1976 I bought a 1968 GTO…beautiful car!! I had it for a few years until someone decided to hit me and total it out. When I heard that the GTO was coming back, I had checkbook in hand. Then I saw it.
Now I don’t need a full retro package (e.g., the Mustang may have went a bit too far), but I would like to see a more aggresive exterior. DON’T MESS UP THE INTERIOR THOUGH. The new GTO interior is one of the best I’ve sat in. It would be nice to allow an LS7 like option, also. I know that is the flagship engine for the new Vette but I absolutely need a 4-seater. Please don’t punish us “4-seater needers.” One last thing…is there any way you could let us know what to expect in the ‘06 GTO and especially the ‘07 GTO? Can you give us a sketch of what may come about for the ‘07 looks? I’ve waited 25+ years for the GTO and just want to know if the ‘07 is worth the wait or if the ‘06 is the one for me. Thank you.
Why not put propetual motion engines in effect, and knock all of these hybirds out?????
Dear Bob,
Why do you insist on making the Chevy Monte Carlo a 2-door version of the Impala?
The Monte should be an affordable rear-wheel-drive vehicle. A Sub-20 grand V6 model would sell really well and a V8 SS Model would fly also.
Bring back the Camaro and Firebird!
Another thing: get a new advertising agency. The Cobalt ads miss the point entirely. How about showing more of the car, especially the interior to let people know how much its improved? How about putting in comments from the press that are praising the car?
The Caddy ads need some juice also. It’s time to dump Led Zeppelin already. How about the Doors’ Break on Through to the other side as the new anthem?
Also for Cadillac, you should get rid of the wreath around the emblem and just have the crest surrounded by black. The wreath looks like old and so does having the word Cadillac in script. It’s time to modernize the look.
The front end of the Caddys, especially the CTS and SRX, really look cheesy and cheap. I would get rid of the chrome bar on the front of the hood and make the grill metallic body color, personally. And please fix the interiors! Look at a BMW and Audi and follow their lead in interior quality.
It’s time to take Caddy and the rest of GM to the next level. No more pushrods — save those for the trucks. No electric steering, better seats, nicer steering wheels, 2 tone black/color interiors, longer warranties, better advertising, etc.
Dear Sir,
I live in Cairo-Egypt, and since my childhood in Dubai-UAE and I have the aim to be a successful car designer. I have been worked for it since very long time and I can never find my self in my country because the automotive industry is not here but buses. So that, I can not see my self or feel my success in what I do for this sircumastances I live.
I have wrote to the most of the automotive industries overseas to find for my self a good opportunity so mostly the answers are the same in must being carried transportation design degree. I didn’t mind and I started corresponding to the schools and universities which responsible for it and I got most answers that whether I’m talented enough so I do not need that courses because it will be waste of money nor I find the tution fees were horribly expensive for me!
Thus, in GM-Fastlane opinion, What I got to do?..I feel so depressed regarding this issue otherwise waste of my time and efforts.
Thank you with regards
Yaser Farook
Cairo-Egypt
http://www.yaser-design.de
Saab uses an angled door beam, to help channel side impact forces towards the B pillar, and the pelvis. Why haven’t we seen this trickle down into our domestic brands?
Mr. Lutz,
I happen to be a huge fan of yours, and love what you’re trying to do for GM.
I do agree with Noel however, on the need for GM to improve its image through big budget advertising rather than rebates. Just last week, I was arguing with a close friend to make her buy American. Her argument was that the Toyota Corolla was the safest small car in America! This is because of the IIHS side-impact test results that were splayed all over the news last week! Neon’s disastrous results overshadowed the fact that the safest small car is the Malibu not the Corolla.
Here’s what you don’t seem to have made consumers aware about the last week’s crash test results that hogged US headlines:
Fourteen of the 16 cars tested earned a “poor,” the lowest of four ratings in tests by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The Chevrolet Cobalt and the Toyota Corolla earned the second-highest rating of “acceptable,” but only when they were tested with their optional side air bags. They earned “poor” ratings without the air bags.
Several of the vehicles offer optional side air bags, but the institute will only test those vehicles without side air bags unless the manufacturer provides a second vehicle with the option installed. Toyota Motor Co. provided the Corolla with side air bags and General Motors Corp. provided the Cobalt and Saturn Ion.
Cobalt, a new model for 2005, was rated “good,” the institute’s highest rating, for front and rear crashes. The Corolla was judged “good” for front impacts but “poor” for rear crashes.
So as you said in an interview with Detroit News some time back: GM needs only to change customer perceptions, because its cars are already as good if not better than Jap stuff. And this, my hero, can only be done through mass media campaigns, not just, as you also said in the same interview, through word of mouth and the internet (although bloggers like me will help ya)!
Thanks,
Vazir Fatehi
Bombay.
Mr. Lutz,
One of the greatest designs in the last 20 years was the 2001 Impala. It lured me away from the Japanese and every single one of my friends was jealous. I had a simple black base model. The performance was amazing, in that it “felt like you were driving something” when you accelerate on to the freeway. Little things like the ignition on the dash, and a spartan design, which struck most as underwhelming, but I noticed that the design held up over time, unlike most, which you grow sick of after 2 months. The body lines of that car were immediately copied, unsuccessfully I might add by the Japanese.
The biggest disappointment for me was that you guys didn’t seem to appreciate what you had. That Impala was hardly marketed and when it was, you chose to ignore everything about it that made it so cool. I feel it is a mistake not to play to your strengths in marketing, instead using ad saturation to try and convince people that those new Caddy’s aren’t butt ugly. Alas, over the last 5 years the Impala has weakened that design to look more like the knockoffs of the competitors, squandering what was a righteous cop car for the masses.
This mentality has born fruit in the Colbalt, which is a really cool name for, and I’m really sorry, a Cavalier. That 2001 Impala was one of the finest achievements in GM history, and its momentum was squandered. Recently my home was used as a location for the final scene of a Hollywood film currently in production. The hero says his final words, and walks across the street to get into his car and drive away. (into the sunset?) The hero’s car in this 2005 production? A navy blue 2001 stock Impala. Sigh…
Given where GM is today in the world auto market, “me too” styling will not make it. Cars that are Chrysler/Japanese/German look-a-likes will be overlooked. GM styling cannot be “as good as” other makes; it must be classic, trendsetting style that will lead the market. The point of departure for this style is not other makes, but the classic, form-follow-function style of U.S. cars of the late 1930s and Italian postwar designs of the 1950s and 1960′.
Some design cues can be found in the basic lines of current Chrysler models, which could be applicable if they were stripped down of their exagerated, over-the-top grills and chrome accents, etc. Some can be found in the lines of current German models, which are now the design leaders, and their Japanese imitators, but the desirable aspects of these designs all follow from the aforesaid classic styles of the 1939-1965 period.
To create market-leading style, GM must derive it from these same classic sources. Now more than ever GM cars must be lean, minimalist designs that exhibit only sensuous, living curves and shed all cutting edge, straightline, wedge shapes that exist only in mechanical design classes and nowhere in the flow of the real world.
All models must be put on a diet: excess chrome, accent lines, etc. eliminated and overweight fenders and rear ends trimmed down. Small car design should follow from classic Alpha GTV and Sprint coupes and Fiat Spyders and Sport Coupes; large cars from a shorter, leaner Jaguar XJ6, cleaned up Mercedes S Class or updated Maserati Quattroporte design. If the end result looks like the next model delivered by Pininfarina or Bertone, the right answer has been found.
In any case, if GM is to keep market share, much less gain back what has been lost, it must find its way back to the classic car designs it produced pre and post war. Above and beyond anything else, styling sells cars, and only surpassing, industry-leading style will get people back to GM.
Mr. Lutz,
I would like to take this time to tell you how important it is for GM to come back out with the camaro. I just ordered a 05 Mustang and I’m 27 years old. Although, I work for Ford through an agency that does not mean I have to buy a Ford since I do not directly work for the company. However, when deciding what to buy I could not come across a better deal that anyone had to offer, even from the asian automakers. I beleive that if GM took designing cue from the 67-69 camaro GM would have a big hit. Design is so important in todays market place. People want to drive excitement (ex. 05 300C, 05 Mustang). If you look back at when GM really dominated the market it had nice designs. People are craving this camaro and even a Mustang fan like myself wants to see GM do this car right. The new GTO is not a muscle car with the way it looks and I think thats way its sales are not what GM expected. Bring back some of the heritage of GM through its products (ex. corvette has been true to its roots and has always had good numbers in sales). If I was to give advice on this camaro I would say do the long hood with the short back deck with a wide stance. Please do not mess things up by pricing it way to high or history will repeat itself by the Mustang crushing it in sales. 20k-26k should be the price.
Bob, I just read in the news that you think American engineering students should be more hands on. You should check out a program called the Foundry Educational Foundation (GM is one of the sponsors) that works with technical programs in schools like engineering and material science to insure that students get that chance. They also make sure they get the chance to see the real world while they are learning the theory. Its a great model for what you are talking about, and a great way for educators and industry to work together.
Dear Mr Lutz:
I am a 54 year old California business owner with a passion for everything automotive; be it model cars, slot cars, books or 1:1 cars. My father was a 30 year veteran of GM engineering. At present my daily driver is a 2002 BMW M3, joined in the garage by my wife’s 1998 BMW 528i, a ‘63 Corvette roadster, a ‘68 Buick Rivera, ‘67 Chevy stepside hot rod pickup, 1972 Alfa Romeo GTV and a 1976 Lancia Scorpion.
During my childhood I dreamed of ‘57 Chevy Nomads and Corvettes. Though entitled to a substantial GM employee family discount, try as I may, I have not been able to force myself to purchase a GM automobile in the last 15 years. Other than the 1984 to 2005 Corvettes, bottom line I cannot get past my distaste for GM styling.
I have watched your efforts to reverse GM’s declining market position with great interest. I had high hopes, and though I am not ready to throw in the towel, I continue to see many of the past design mistakes being repeated.
There are three points I would like to make to you.
#1 In my opinon, exterior design is the single most important aspect contributing to the success or failure of a new car offering. If the design doesn’t entice the buyer to take a closer look, the price, quality, performance etc. do not matter.
#2 You only get one chance to make a first impression. Why didn’t the new GTO look like the one on the front of Autoweeks Nov. 4 issue. If the GTO had looked like that my M3 would be gone. With your design sense, you had to know the GTO shape was too much the boring jelly bean.
#3 Gimmicks do not make good design. The Cadillac edgy design theme and the current theme of making our cars look like our successful Chevy trucks, is not good design. The lines are jarring, out of portion, tacky looking or down right boring. This continues GM Stylings desperate and misguided attempts over the years to create an identifiable “face” for its product lines. Remember the hideously out of place notch back rear window mid-sized models from the early 80s or the pregnant looking lower body cladding adpoted by Pontiac?
Why is it so hard for GM? Try as I might to like them, GM continues produce designs that would end up at the bottom of a trash can at Pininfarina or Bertone. Any company that has produced the Caprice, the Aztek and the current Monte Carlo, H2, Malibu and Impala has dug a huge hole for itself with the press and buying public.
As I sit in airplanes traveling around the world on behalf of my company, I have written this letter many times in my head. I want GM to succeed. I want to buy its cars. I want to be proud of the cars made in America. Give me something that does not turn me off at first sight.
I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to communicate so directly with decision makers at GM. I hope this blog is a sign of true openess to change at GM.
Sincerely – Todd F. Radke
PS – Please build the Autoweek Nov. 4 GTO cover car. It is the most beautiful 2 door sports sedan design I have ever seen. I am ready to replace my M3.
I also read your speech to the Pratt Institute students with great interest. Good advice, a great philosophy and apparent understanding or automobile design. Why do I feel that the actions do not match the words? My father, a 30 year veteran of GM engineering told me “the only thing that will save GM is 100 well placed funerals”.
I hope your good intentions and talents are not being hindered by the who you know and not what you culture my father so detested.
In response to Daniel Mora,
The SSR was a flop because it was priced out of the middle class market. It wasn’t special for performance as you pointed out. It was a cool look that cost too much for the people that would like what it had to offer. Price it $26,000 to $34,000 and you would sell a mint of ‘em. Hummers are GM’s offering for the filthy rich. SSR’s that are priced for the middle class would make GM more money than sparse profit only collector item sales.
What most dolts will call the blunder from down under I will call the Thunder from down Under. The interior of the new GTO is simply one of the best I have seen in any GM car or badged car for that matter at its price. I love it. Now just give me that Monaro CV8 dash pod and DVD navigation and I’ll be even more happy.
GM seeks one universal buyer incentive. Its top marketing minds meet and ask each other, “What’s the one thing GM has that no one else can offer?” OnStar.
OR
It could have asked, “What’s the one thing The Market needs that GM can uniquely fulfill?”
GM chose to place all its bets on guilting buyers that maybe their kids would be safer if when the car flipped into a ditch and the airbag deployed maybe the cellphone wouldn’t work and no one would contact 9-1-1 but OnStar would contact a satellite and someone in a phone room would come to the rescue or at least tell you where the nearest restaurant is for only $39/month.
OR
GM could use its financial might to work fuel rebates OR boast its superior durability OR dealer-service network OR remind people that GM provides more jobs to Americans than Toyota although the latter brags about their impact on the “landscape” here.
Mr. Lutz, the sad, sad fact is that GM cars are boring as h**l.
I’ve had GM cars in the past that were exciting, wonderfully built cars and I own a C5 Corvette today, but that’s the only GM car I would own, with the possible exception of some of the Cadillacs.
GM Trucks are wonderful. They should be. GM has spent millions on them in the last decade and they show it (I do wish you’d put a bit more thought into pulling the four wheel steering option though. Get the price down and it’ll sell). But the cars are nothing but rental car specials. There’s not a car GM makes that even gets a second look in a parking lot, unfortunately, even the wonderful GTO … that looks like a Cadillac Centera.
You’re going to have to build cars that catch the eye, that don’t look like every other car on the road. That aren’t powered by six-cylinders with four speed automatic transmissions.
Japan can do it. Why can’t you?
Mr. Lutz,
I have own GM cars for over 14 years and my last purchase was a Yukon 4X4 2003. Once a Year I do a very good washing under the entire body myself, taking down first the spare tire. With the Yukon in my garage it took me one hour after reading the instuctions to release the tire and puled it down. My question is if this SUV is meant to drive off road and for any reason I need to change the spare tire it woud make sense to have it if would take less time to call for assistence and wait in the car for cupple hours?
Is time the Engeneers take one hour over this issue before the car goes in to production!
Being a GM loyalist, I now have a CTS and Olds Silhouette. I have owned a number of Pontiacs and I am really excited about the Solsitice. I follow the solsticeforum.com closely to catch any information possible. I am one of the Lucky EOP First 1000!
I live in FL so anytime for delivery is good for me so long as GM does all it can to keep edging up on the quality and so far so good from all I have seen. I do have a comment regarding the photos pertaining to the two tone leather interior. Varied photos show a washed out grey and sand tone and others like the photo of the Black car with the two tone showing a darker black and richer carmel colored leather. I am hopeful that the later photo is more representative than the sample swatch in the colors section. Go for a richer deep tone over a washed out tone in the darker color cars.
Looking for another two this year as well! One Buick Van for my wife and another Pontiac for my daughter. Will be a good year for GM and the Briggs family!
Mr. Lutz,
Everything you say about GM is true. From the press bias to the great interiors and the non existent front wheel drive torque steer. GM has always built great engines and transmissions.
Sure GM lost some of the interior quality and styling in the late 80’s and early 90’s but the company that is around today has changed all of that.
Today GM, has great interiors and performance in every car, except the “Crossover Vans.” The GTO is great and every division is in better shape than ever except possibly the Chevy cars, which just need more exciting designs.
Keep fighting the good fight and beat these foreign cars and companies. Truly the people running GM today are the best and brightest minds in the world and it shows. Dont listen to all of these comments from consumers.
Most of them are from LA and California and they dont consider GM to be American and would rather have a Toyota. They are twisted and messed up people, I know I just moved here from Ohio and these people dont know what “domestic” car companies mean.
You need to win the consumer back with brashness and confidence. Which is in every new Cadillac and Pontiac. Use this confidence to say screw it to the customer and just make the best cars in the world, know matter who will buy them. When you do this, sales and customer’s minds will change.
GM is the greatest car company in the World, start acting like it and start kicking butt again. It shows that you guys know this(just look at the new cars), but it needs to be told to the consumers and the press. We need to change the press and put them on even ground again.
Best of luck and I love my 8th GM vehicle (98 Firebird Conv.) and I am only 24.
Thanks Lutz for working with GM and keep it coming.
Dear Mr. Lutz,
Kudos to GM for trying so hard, making a positive difference, and excellent cars and to those who’ve noticed.
Boos to the selfish hippie-turned-yuppies and their spoiled kids that continually critisize a company that is trying its best to bring out the finest they can. And GM who is turning out the finest they can, is doing an incredible job!
Mr. Lutz you have your hands full. As for these insatiable consumers, I will apologize.
The American auto industry is a gauge or an indicator of the U.S. economy. This being the case, the U.S. is in for a very bumpy ride and maybe a ride off the cliff (if consumer attitude doesn’t change).
To start I would like to give credit where it’s due. The GTO is a big step in the right direction. Any plans to release it in Canada? It seems other domestics are releasing ‘modern classics’ such as the Magnum, Marauder, 05 Mustang (retro design), and 300M. Will GM be releasing more ‘retro’ designs? It would be nice to see GM’s GNX series of vehicles back on roads (of course with a modern flare). I was a teen in the 80’s and couldn’t wait to get one of these or even one of the affordable “classic” sports cars that Chev. and Pontiac manufactured (Firebird & Camaro). Unfortunately, now that I can afford one, they have all been discontinued or moth-balled. I regularly visit a Canadian automotive forum and the majority of posters seem to agree that a ‘retro’ modern version of the GNX and/or Camaro would sell like hot-cakes. I’m not certain I can post the link openly but I would be happy to send it to you through private email if you request it.
I’m looking forward to future GM designs.
Best regards.
TJH
Hi Bob,
One of my favorite all time automotive designs is the 1972-1973 AMC Javelin. This type of bold, and emotive styling is really the only thing I see lacking in GM’s current, and future (concepts) products. GM quality is now among the best of the best. Value and engineering are top notch. The only thing missing is the raw emotion everyone wants to feel the first time they see a car. Chrysler has found the right emotion, but still lacks in quality. If GM can find a way to create it’s own distinctive styles without trying to capitalize with renderings of successful competitor models, consumer respect will immediately follow.
Take care!
Scott
Dear Mr. Lutz,
I would like to thank you for posting you lecture. As simple and silly as the flea story was, I found it thought provoking. Am I doing everything I can to push my own limits?
I have some ideas of my own I would like to share with you.
As you wrote in one of your previous posts, American society has a negative view of our own domestic auto brands. Therefore, it is not enough to market your own products and brands, but now you must build the brand name “America.”
Especially now, our current war efforts have left some citizens and foreign peoples questioning our national direction and motives.
I would start by putting an American flag on your vehicles, just a small emblem, maybe near a brands logo, somewhere on the outside and inside of the vehicle. Small statements can speak loudly.
To coincide with the introduction of the American Emblem on all of your vehicles, all of your marketing campaigns whether in print, tv, or other should include an intelligent and provocative benefit of buying an American product.
People don’t question numbers, look at how influential TV political campaigns are. If you have numerical evidence that your quality rating is higher than foreign brands, post those numbers in front of everyone. Educate your potential consumers.
Have your marketing team think “advertise war bonds”–but not, “in-your-face, dramatic propaganda.” It will be difficult to poise this and set the right tone. But if done correctly could help shift public outlook on domestic auto brands.
Best,
Joel Cardinal
Dear Mr. Lutz,
I must admit that I am a long time GM fan. My first vehicle was Camaro and I have owned Corvettes, and numerous GM trucks and cars alike. I have always been a defender of American cars and opted to spend my auto dollars accordingly.
However, that has changed. I purchased a 2004 Saturn Vue about a year and a half ago. This was the single most disappointing vehicle I have ever owned. It rattled to the point of driving you crazy. The interior was cheap and plastic. In fact, the only saving grace to this otherwise dismal vehicle were the engine and transmission, which are manufactured by Honda. I still find it hard to believe that I did not notice these issues prior to purchasing the vehicle.
Anyway, to make a long story short, I recently purchased my first foreign car, a 2005 Nissan Murano. This is what automotive design and building should be, wonderful fit and finish, thoughtful layout and interior design, keen attention to the “little details”, and, most of all, that proud feeling of owning a vehicle that people stop to look at in a parking lot. This vehicle is aggressive, sexy, and practical all at the same time.
I will continue to watch GM and may someday return as a customer. However, alot will need to change in the mean time. I would suggest a push to completely revamping the entire design team and theme; your designs are “vanilla” at best – take a cue from Nissan and Scion. Interiors need to be upgraded considerably, including materials and features. Stop the rebate madness and put a quality vehicle on the showroom floors priced correctly from the start. Don’t assume that you will keep your customer base, no matter what you place on the dealer’s lots as I am a prime example of another American car buyer just plain getting fed up with GM quality issues. The average buyer is just looking for something that is eye catching, drives well, and will stand the test of real world driving.
Now is the time for change, a few years down the road may be too late for GM.
Good luck and I will be watching.
John
Dear Mr Lutz,
Like yourself, I have taken alot of abuse over my car, a 2003 Pontiac Aztek (long live its soul). Its off the beat styling has allowed it to sell so few that those at GM had decided to cut their loses and send it the way of the history books. Why after introducing it in 2001 did Gm realize that the price point was too high for the demographic group 20-30 year olds? Why did they just decide to end their marketing of it and allow it to be sold mainly by word of mouth by other Aztek owners? Why, because majority of the people who own the Aztek are 30+. It is such a great and versatile vehicle with lots of room and some really cool features such as the ability to add a tent in the rear cargo area. Why couldn’t they do anything to the TEK like you personally created, yes I mean “H**L”. You had named that Aztek appropriately with the Corvette engine, roll cage, 22 inch wheels, dual side exhaust, stick shift, and especially the amazing body kit installed on that vehicle. I bet that in todays age of those who “trick out” their cars, that that would definately be a product of great interest. But now as GM decided to end their losses, now myself and thousands of other happy, loyal and unique Aztek owners are left high and dry with no opportunities to buy anything either OEM or aftermarket to enhance the pleasure we find in our Azteks.
The body stretched over the chassis….wheel and tire proportions correct to the stance of the vehicle. Most American cars sit like trucks…jacked up in the rear so one can count the plastic fender studs and see who made the shocks….all this while walking up to the car. The designer sit the car down to where they should be, then engineering gets the vehicle, applies the old standard specs such as keep the soft ride….allow for 5 passengers with a full tank of gas, full load of luggage and be able to sustain wheel jounce on a 20-30 degree incline at 20 mph…oops , almost forgot guidelines to run with snow chains at 30 mph, and now we have standard jellybean car design.
How does Audi, BMW, and Mercedes , to name a few manage to tweak in rear suspensions so that the car looks better inside the 20ft rule.
From the wheels and chassis on up, whenever following a GM product, look at the body hang ( or hips ) on the vehicle, then look at the track width of the rear tires. Committies, bean counters, shared platforms, all the things that seem to enhance careers at GM has done nothing more than put the company into a deep dive. Bob L. has the insight to create on napkins ( Viper )what designers struggle to achieve for decades.
Just about every vehicle that Chip Foose gets his hands on is a design marvel….pay him what he wants, escort him in from California…. give him a skunkworks studio down in the chambers of GM Deign, and guaranteed within a year, GM will have another winning car.
Go for it Bob.
Ron Cojocar
The SSR is a disaster. What the guy’s on the block want and are willing to pay for is a car on the outside that feels powerful and fast. We dont really care how fast it goes -cause face it how often do we really go fast. Give us a high shoulder and low ground clearance with a luxury interior. Forget cutting the fit on the inside to produce “race cars”. save that for the the tin dashed circle trackers.
Design note: wide shoulders, low ride, tight fit, wide tires. I dont care if it is a 4 or 8 cylinder, just as long as it rolls forward for a good expected lifetime.
We are a website design company and we totally agree.
HA! “Tumble Home” Your opionion is funny, Tell the Toyota people about that one and they`ll show you the numbers on the Scion xB. I have a few more thoughts here, why hasn`t anyone come up with a Hybrid car with a teeny Diesel engine? Coupled with Bio-diesel it would be a pretty clean and economical setup. There needs to be some radical changes for you guys to survive, Lose Buick. The name just sounds stodgy now. …”Yeah Man, I just bought the new Locomobile XL95-i. I love it`s performance and handling!”…Sometimes a name just has to go. But, you know what? I think the biggest moneydrain is the sniveling Union workers and their excessive bennies. The regular people can`t afford a years wages for a new safer family car.
Dear Mr. Lutz:
This past December, I purchased a new Ford Five Hundred Limited. I purchased it in spite of the fact that I prefered the new 2006 Impalas I test drove. The reason we went with the Ford is that none of the Impala’s we drove (LT, LTZ & SS) offered three features that are important to my wife — automatic climate control, power adjustable pedals (or tilt/telescopic steering wheel), and memory settings for the seats & mirrors. Therefore, I feel that if GM want to recapture my business in this general category, it needs to make the features available on the Impala align with those offered by Ford on their equivalent model.
By the way, my wife loves her 2005 Buick Ranier (with power pedals, memory seats, and dual zone ACC).
Thank you.
My original favorite GM car was a 69 GTO purchased in 1969. I owned a 1989 Silverado and put 157,000 miles on it. The paint peeled, the headliner foam decomposed, the doorliner vinyl cracked, the cruise control, oxygen sensor and air conditioner all failed. The valve guides leaked oil. The manual tranny had to be rebuilt. One year, driving in unusual 103F heat in Philly stalled traffic on the PA Turnpike, every broken down car I saw was GM except for a scattering of Fords. These experiences turned me all Japanese. Just a few weeks ago I saw a brand new Escalade with one of the running lights burned out. Please, raise the quality of your electronics and adhesives and paint.
We can all look back fondly at the Opel GT, as Bob does in his May 12 post. It and its soulmate, the early Corvette, were a glimmer of what GM design might have been, a return to the aethestic of Italian/European/US classic design. Look at the inspiration for the GT, the Ferrari GT cars of the late 60’s. Why not go back to this mother lode and mine it for all the terrific designs produced? Jaguar and the rest of the Brits have always done so and won more than their share of awards.
Why not a Pontiac quarttroporte? Not a Dodge Charger with slab sides and overdone scoops but a true elegant,curvaceous Italian. Look at what went into the the Solstice and apply it to every model in the lineup. GM could move ahead of once-leading German styling, which now suffers an overdone airflow/wind tunnel shape and “bustle” rear end.
It’s not taking a huge chance. It’s the only way to win the game. Automobiles are styling, styling, styling.
Mr. Lutz,
I am one of many that really liked the “Aztek From Hell”. I would really like to do my Aztek like it, and would like to find out how to get the parts. If there is anyway, please let me know.
Thank you.
GM is the desing leader in the US, if not the world. Japan is the land of the boring auto. America is the and of the exciting auto. It is that simple….
Wouldn’t styling be simplied immensely, and therefore more greatly freed to concentrate on customer desire and stylist artistry, if styling concepts were constrained to a manufacturability database?
I spent 5 years in die engineering creating similar models for stamping dies, to no avail, I might add. The models worked better than I ever hoped, but for some reason the project was squashed.
Perhaps it just never reached the ears and eyes of the proper authority above the level I was dealing with.
I know these principles can be applied upstream, and not only enhance product development, but also severely reduce cost, lead time, and virtually eliminate errors and non-manufacturability.
Toyota gets many kudos from the analyst industry for their measures, which I feel are not all that impressive in how they achieve their product development cycle.
on the new camaro will you be able to put 15″ wheels on it,or will it be like my 1993 f body that you have to go with 16″ or bigger.Their are a lot of people that like the look of 15″ wheels.
Bob,
I liked this thread, and I liked the straight comment.
A related thought to your reasoning on tumblehome is that a perfectly built home will not be perceived that way if the paint job stinks.
I’ll use Chevrolet as my example because I was raised in a “Chevy’ family in the midwest.
The gold (yellow) Chevy bowtie wrecks the current exterior colors, in a more sophisticated buyer’s market. People object to that single exterior treatment, and never get to the real characteristics of the vehicles. Why not permit body color and silver to calm it down and to draw more people to the brand?
Dave, what are you taking about? The SSR is destined to be a future classic.
The only real problem was cost related to it not being a mass-produced vehicle and dealers jacking up the prices.