Packard Forum Index » General

Good point about the 'shared platform' trend of the industry at the time. But, as u say, it was carried too far and definately for too long.

TO a great extent, the shared platform was the same problem that dilluted Packards image ala 110 vs 160 and 180's and even the 55-56 Clipper vs Sr's.

The upshot of marketing an automobile is much like that of clothes and cosmetics. It is the buying public's attitude toward the car.

AN ATTITUDE THAT IS THE RESULT OF PROMOTION and NOT public intellect. The Big 3 along with other closely related entities decided to use scare tactics instead of socio/psycho/sexual tactics that had promoted the automoibile from prewar 6 cylinder runabouts to the HP revolution of the early to mid 50's just after WWII.

This promotion tactic problem over the last 20 -30 years is what happens when bean counters and sales/social gimmicks run rampant.

The public viewpoint of the automobile is now a on a par with a laundry appliance rather than that of adventure, prestige or desire or intrigue.

Who do u really want America to see using your product??? Some 200 pound socker mom shuttleing back and forth to work while she roars at the gas pump like Helen Reddy???? OR someone like CHristy Brinkly on a vacation adventure?????

SOMEWHERE in the product line up there has to be at least one REAL flagship model. That DOES NOT MEAN K cars disguised as New Yorkers or Chevy cavaliers disguised as Cadillac to point out 2 extremely STUPID tactics that only a group of pin heads could think they can get away with.

It may be a mistake to get into personal experiences as opposed to keepint to corporate culture and philosphy (and sometimes corporate necessity), but it does relate as to how my own personal puchasing habits have formed. I'd be glad to delete is you wish.

I've had about a dozen new cars in my life, one AMC (62), one Ford (current Lincoln MKZ), one Jeep (prior to Chrysler ownership), one GMC, and all the others Chrysler products. The Chrysler products varied from quite outstanding to pretty mediochre, but never had any significant mechanical problems, the Jeep gave the best overall service of about 160,000 miles and never a significant repair bill.

But by far the worst was my only GMC car, a 1972 Buick Centurion. After that experience I said I'd never buy another GM car and I haven't. But I don't view the factory that designed and produced it as the real culprit, it really was a lovely car in power, comfort, fit and finish, etc. I blame the dealership who chose to let the warranty run out rather than attend to problems.

It was bad enough to loose the transmission on the first 5 mile drive home for the dealership, and to experience a spun rod bearing before 100 miles. The dealership fixed those things, though not with a new motor and transmission but with factory refurbished units. The real pain was electrical; frequently sometimes very frequently, the windshield wiper motor and one or more power window motors would burn out. The dealer just kept replacing them without every looking for the root cause, until that day when he said "can't help, warranty expired". That's when I sold it and despite my desire to buy American, I've never owned another GM car.

The current Lincoln is based on a Mazda platform as if the Ford Fusion and a Mercury model. Thus far it's a very satisfactory vehicle and if that continues to be true, I'd likely look to Ford for the next car.

PackardV8 -

Well, the smartest and most beneficial sharing was done at the component level - below the surface. For example, the headlight switch in a lowly Vega was used not only in nearly every other passenger car platform of the time, but many truck products as well. You won't see that as much in the 1980s, and it's become almost non-existent in more recent years.

Shared platforms certainly do have their place in a well-balanced operation. A good example was the platform shared between GM F-body and X-body, providing economies of scale for the production of the Nova and Camaro and their corporate brethren, but that evaporated in the 1980s. Another good example was GM's B- and C- chassis, giving you "junior" lines like Impala, Caprice, Catalina, Bonneville, Delta 88, and LeSabre and "senior" lines like Ninety-eight, Electra, and DeVille - the latter having the same basic frame, but of with longer wheelbase and with stouter suspension, brakes, and rear axle.

Yet, things got terribly out of hand with platform sharing in the 1980s. While the 1976 Seville was born out of the X-body, there were significant upgrades throughout; at "best", you might interchange a door with a Nova. On the other hand, the 1982 Cimarron was little more than a Cavalier with a different grille, some Caddy badges and a leather interior. Check out the parts books and you'll find the P/N for the front fenders of the Cavalier and the Cimarron are one in the same; they didn't even bother to change the feature lines of the stampings. Granted, GM sold every Cimarron it ever built, but once a customer realizes they've been had like that, they don't usually go back for a second fleecing. Though that was 30 years ago, experiences like that have a way of getting handed down through the generations.

Pumping up the K-car platform to build the best-selling minivan was one thing, but Chrysler also took things too far and too long with sharing of that platform. By the time their next-gen front wheel drive platform - the LH - came out, the company was in such bad shape that the joke in the industry was those letters stood for "Last Hope". Instead of investing in itself during the 1980s, Chrysler misspent its success on acquisitions, like Gulfstream, AMC, etc. - like may other US industries that have failed.

Minivans filled a void created by downsizing, but when they became unfashionable, people headed for trucks and SUVs. The automakers would have you believe the latter went out of fashion solely because of soaring fuel costs, while denying that their window sticker prices had become outrageous.

Certainly, as the '53 Corvette proved, every brand can benefit from a halo vehicle to get people in the showroom, but you gotta have cars that people need and can afford, yet be proud to own - not overpriced, overcomplicated, mundane-looking transportation appliances. Grwoing up in the 1960s and 1970s, come the annual fall car announcment in showrooms, my dad would bring one of every brochure in the Chevy line home for me to pore over, and there wasn't a single platform in the Chevy line-up that I wouldn't be proud to won. In fact, the back of many brouchure contained a checklist fo optional equipment and were aptly titled "Build Your Own...".

However, as the price of new vehicles grew out of reach of the average person during the 1980s, the industry turned to leasing - selling a monthly payment instead of a tangible product. Meanwhile, cost of out-of-pocket repairs has become the new planned obsolescence. It's now not only impractical to rebuild most engines and transmissions, but you might as well trade the vehicle in if you've got a brake problem that goes beyond replacing pads and rotors. The end result is that resale values are so bad for so many vehicles now, that fair market value of lease turn-ins vs. the residual values (quote to determine lease payments) has brought the worst automakers and financing companies to their knees.

I view the present scenario as justice hard-earned. Executives at these corporations should be viewed as dinosaurs who should be left to extinction.

"It was bad enough to loose the transmission on the first 5 mile drive home for the dealership, and to experience a spun rod bearing before 100 miles. "

I think i would blame the factory for that. NOT the dealer. But yes, it was a very bad experience to chase anyone away from GM or Buick.

Altho i'm surprised u got such good service from the Jeep. It was a 6 cylinder???

I'm also surprised that u did not experience severe and CHRONIC problems with the Chrysler ECM's from about 1976 thru 1985. Most everyone did especialy in high humidity and rain areas.

Ya know, even the run of the mill, grocery getter, "affordable" vehicles really aren't anymore. I used to be a dyed in the wool Ford fan. Between not having a dependable vehicle, a (at the time) great credit rating, and a (once again, at the time) demanding wife, I was talked into purchasing a 2002 Taurus. It turned out to be the worst, biggest piece of automotive crap that I've ever had. The problems that I experienced with this vehicle are too numerous to list, quite literaly. Recently, I overheard some scuttlebutt that Ford was going to be purchased by someplace in China! What the hell? Besides produce, alchohol and quilts, is there ANYTHING really made in the good ol' U S of A anymore?

Quote:
Agreed, but that sharing can't help but bring to mind a commercial from the 80's. One company showed a row of cars of different makes from same company X starting at their low price range--but essentially looking the same sans grill and name. Commentator went on to say that while company X also built fine cars, his company strove to be different so if you bought his car, your neighbors would know it was a fine car. Couldn't have been more true as you mentioned with the comparison of makes.

I've never bought a NEW car in my life. Never will.

Here is an illustration of the kind of executive talent that used to be found in American industry.

In the mid 30s Charles Nash was planning his retirement from head of Nash Motors. He asked around his old friends like Walter Chrysler and others, for the names of smart young men who could take over his job.

One name that came up several times was George Mason. Mason made a name for himself by reviving the dying Kelvinator refrigerator and appliance company.

This in itself was an achievement. But Nash said there were 2 things that were especially impressive.

One, he took Frigidaire from near bankruptcy to a leading position in the industry, in the middle of the worst depression in America's history.

Two, he didn't fire anybody. The same management team were in charge after the turnaround as before.

Can you imagine one of today's CEO's doing that?

I agree about Iaccoca being a blowhard. He took credit for a lot of things he had nothing to do with, such as the K car that was already in place when he took over at Chrysler.

I also agree that his vision and forward planning ability were weak and what ideas he had, came from other people.

However he deserves credit for doing a tough job well. Most of what he did was sheer hard work of mind numbing boredom, the kind that any normal person shies away from. He dug in and took care of business.

I have owned Ford Crown Victorias (full frame, V-8, rear drive) for almost 30 years and the last 2 a 1981 and a 1997 share the same frame which has been in use since 1979. All have been excellent reliable comfortable vehicles. I am looking for a newer one before this model is discontinued in 2011. It will likely be my last car. The problems with any of them have been relatively minor although the 97 has been the worst for repair but the best for comfort and gas mileage. My last game warden vehicle was a 1993 Chevrolet Caprice with the LT1 engine and it was an outstanding vehicle also. I am old fashioned but I like the safety of a full frame and the ease of maintenance of a rear drive.