Pontiac Solstice Forum banner

1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've been trying to follow the car on the Pontiac site, but thats mostly hype. Watching Dateline Detroit the other day, I heard the Executive Engineer behind this car mention both supercharged and n/a applications. Now, looking at the tech/chasis pics on this site I'm wondering...
Are we going to get the Eaton srew and 240hp, or just an n/a version, or either as an option?
Blown or blown away?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Rumor is that a supercharger may initially be available as a dealer installed option - as GM Performance is doing w/ kits they supply now for Cavaliers, etc.

I would prefer GM just make this available from the factory right off the bat though - it makes little sense (to me at least) that they could have a kit a dealer is going to install, but not be able to have the same assembly done (more accurately and cheaper) at the plant. Of course, unless there is some silly UAW agreement in the way or something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Why the negativity about the UAW? We would be pleased if GM would allow our membership to do all of the work on the car.:confused:
Anyhoo-- Where is the car going to be assembled? I sure hope it is in North America so I can buy one with clear conscience. This may be the best thing GM has had in many years, if all of the promises and hype turn out to be true. Go get 'em, Bob Lutz!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Michael Wallace said:
Why the negativity about the UAW?
Not so much negativity, but reality. The UAW has put up a lot of roadblocks to how GM does business - surely delayed the replacement for the Cavalier and other models, and has been a large contributing factor to GM being slow to the market in general. For all I know, the UAW has something in their contract stating that they will not be required to install superchargers on engines under 3.0L or something silly, as they would fear it may lead to layoffs at a different engine factory...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Let me tell you about the UAW. It is sometimes very political. I sometimes disagree with their stands on certain issues. However, as clearly stated in our contract, The General has the right to run its business the way it sees fit.
So, do you blame the UAW for slow research and development? Most of those jobs are salaried or contracted. Do you blame the membership for quality issues? We only build what we are told to when we are told and in a manner that they tell us to build it. Look at the recalls in the last 2 weeks. Electrical design faults in Cavalier steering columns.The Gen III truck engines have design faults that are being addressed- again not the fault of the UAW membership.
This Wednesday is the anniversary of the sit down strikes in Flint, Michigan. If it was not for those dedicated people taking a stand so many years ago, the common working man would still be Bob Cratchett, And GM would be Scrooge. Because of strong unions (not only the UAW, but others also) every worker in the country is better off, including the salaried people at GM.
Okay, my rant is almost over. UAW members are not slovenly greedy morons, as portrayed in the media. We are hard working people who want to make GM the greatest car company in the world. We are proud to make world class products that people want. So please give it a rest. Put blame on GM when they don't redesign the Cavalier in a timely fashion or when there are quality issues that they take forever to address.
I would be happy to share more examples of mgmt. vs. union,
and trust me it would not always look pretty for either side, but give credit where credit is due. (and blame where it is due)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
You make good points - and I surely don't mean to offend - nothing is ever truly black or white, but there are definitely plenty of cases where contracts with the UAW have prevented changes that GM was needing to stay competitive. The redesigned Cavalier was one area where UAW contracts definitely slowed GM from getting an updated model out.

My point is that it seems that the UAW management itself often shoots itself in the foot across the long term, trying to save a few jobs or increase salaries in the short term. A healthy, profitbable, world-class GM is in both the UAWs and the shareholders best interest.

Anyway, we are way off topic here... we can start another perhaps if we want to debate this some more :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
If GM is waiting on the supercharger, it is likely for technical development reasons, or possibly for marketing reasons. They will probably sell all they can build the first year, so why not hold the S/C version to keep the excitement going a year longer. A lot like the Beetle did w/ the Turbo. Then, if they add a 300hp version, they might launch that the 3rd or 4th year, mid-life, to keep the vehicel fresh. They would probably also boost the HP of the base engine a bit around that time also.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
GMFan said:
Rumor is that a supercharger may initially be available as a dealer installed option - as GM Performance is doing w/ kits they supply now for Cavaliers, etc.

I would prefer GM just make this available from the factory right off the bat though - it makes little sense (to me at least) that they could have a kit a dealer is going to install, but not be able to have the same assembly done (more accurately and cheaper) at the plant. Of course, unless there is some silly UAW agreement in the way or something.
The car will only be NA the 1st year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
GMFan said:
Not so much negativity, but reality. The UAW has put up a lot of roadblocks to how GM does business - surely delayed the replacement for the Cavalier and other models, and has been a large contributing factor to GM being slow to the market in general. For all I know, the UAW has something in their contract stating that they will not be required to install superchargers on engines under 3.0L or something silly, as they would fear it may lead to layoffs at a different engine factory...
Not sure where you are getting this poor information, but I have never heard anything like this anywhere. The role out of the vehicle with anything other than normally aspirated engines has more to do with development time. We just don't have time to validate everything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Definitely, GMFan and Micheal have good points, but as a law student interested in labor law, I have come to realize that Unions, though often beneficial to workers, frequently seek to limit technology advancement, even when it is clearly in the best interest of the company. For instance, a dockworker's union once demanded that a provision be included in the collective bargaining agreement that allowed workers to unpack and repack prepacked crates before loading them on the ships. This was in the 60's or 70's when containerization began. Manufacturers began to pack crates, which were lifted on to trains, then transported to docks and lifted onto the ships withouht having to unload each individual item. Obviously, this threatened some jobs, but it was clearly the efficient and economical thing to do. So, some dockworkers unpacked the crates for no other reason than to have something to get paid for. They may as well have stayed at home and eaten bon bons and gotten paid for that.
Unions are also inefficient in that contracts often last 3-5 years, requiring companies to remain in compliance. This might affect the closing or retooling of a plant, which would otherwise result in cars being updated more often.
IMHO Unions also create an antagonistic environment, often discouraging teamwork and efficiency. Many contracts have prohibited crosstraining and multitasking for fear that some jobs would be eliminated because one person could perform several duties.
Anyway, I am not anti-worker, but as GMfan said, efficiency and market dominance are more important in the long term than short term job protection. We should find better ways to increase wages and help unemployed workers than to allow balatant inefficeincy in our stumbling manufacturing sector.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Good info, jckjds. I was unable to locate the article, but I recall the problems GM had w/ the next Cavalier back in the late 90s, or perhaps 2000 or so. They had wanted to re-design at that time, but part of the re-design required a reduction in jobs so that GM could try to sell the Cavalier profitably, rather than losing a few thousand $ on each one they sell.

The UAW contract blocked this from happening, and so GM let the current outdated Cavalier carry on for another 4+ years. If I recall, GM was forced to drop their plans and initial investments, costing tens or hundreds of millions, and we are just now going to be getting the Cavalier replacement w/ the Cobalt.

Hopefully relations with the UAW have improved since that time.

And, I surely don't mean to imply that all of GMs problems are union related. A lot are because of management decisions as well.

In any regards, just imagine how many more jobs there would be if GM was making world-class cars across all of their model range and was able to get 35 or 40% market share again... Hopefully Kappa and the Solstice (as well as other things like the revival at Cadillac, the new Vette, and help for Buick's aging lineup) are the start of this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
GMFan said:
Good info, jckjds. I was unable to locate the article, but I recall the problems GM had w/ the next Cavalier back in the late 90s, or perhaps 2000 or so. They had wanted to re-design at that time, but part of the re-design required a reduction in jobs so that GM could try to sell the Cavalier profitably, rather than losing a few thousand $ on each one they sell.

The UAW contract blocked this from happening, and so GM let the current outdated Cavalier carry on for another 4+ years. If I recall, GM was forced to drop their plans and initial investments, costing tens or hundreds of millions, and we are just now going to be getting the Cavalier replacement w/ the Cobalt.

Hopefully relations with the UAW have improved since that time.

And, I surely don't mean to imply that all of GMs problems are union related. A lot are because of management decisions as well.

In any regards, just imagine how many more jobs there would be if GM was making world-class cars across all of their model range and was able to get 35 or 40% market share again... Hopefully Kappa and the Solstice (as well as other things like the revival at Cadillac, the new Vette, and help for Buick's aging lineup) are the start of this.
Boy, you guys must be talking about some other GM. I worked on that product, and it had absolutely nothing to do with the Union. Makes a good story though!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Spoon,

I didn't intend to say anything bad about your particular union or the specific problem that GMfan is talking about. I was only relaying some thoughts about unions generally based upon some less-than-desireable things unions have done in the past to preserve jobs in the short term.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Spoon said:
Boy, you guys must be talking about some other GM. I worked on that product, and it had absolutely nothing to do with the Union. Makes a good story though!
Hopefully you are right - this was an issue in the late 90s if I recall, so hopefully it is a different GM today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
QOUTE:

I have come to realize that Unions, though often beneficial to workers, frequently seek to limit technology advancement, even when it is clearly in the best interest of the company.




Okay--- What are your ideas for better working conditions/worker benefits,in addition to being more competetive? You have obviously never sweat on the floor of a foundry or crawled up under the dash of a car 400 times a day to install wiring. These jobs are only high paying because 30 years ago the auto companies had such a high turnover that money was the only way to get manpower to stay.
We in the auto industry certainly face tough competition and we all want to keep our jobs for the present as well as for future generations. The Union is partially responsible for worker protection laws that afford the U.S. one of the lowest rates for worker death and injury. People died for the cause and you ,too, benefit from it whether you want to face it or not.

I BEG G.M. to be more competetive and if you came to work with me for a day you would see that there is a LOT of waste that has nothing to do with The Union.We struggle to keep 25 year old machinery running.
But we do. And with much pride and hard work.


In closing, go ahead and go to school and learn from the people in the Ivory Tower of Acadamia. Then work for a summer doing some real work getting $5 per hour. Then maybe you will appreciate what the Union does for the common man.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Michael Wallace said:
QOUTE:

I have come to realize that Unions, though often beneficial to workers, frequently seek to limit technology advancement, even when it is clearly in the best interest of the company.




Okay--- What are your ideas for better working conditions/worker benefits,in addition to being more competetive? You have obviously never sweat on the floor of a foundry or crawled up under the dash of a car 400 times a day to install wiring. These jobs are only high paying because 30 years ago the auto companies had such a high turnover that money was the only way to get manpower to stay.
We in the auto industry certainly face tough competition and we all want to keep our jobs for the present as well as for future generations. The Union is partially responsible for worker protection laws that afford the U.S. one of the lowest rates for worker death and injury. People died for the cause and you ,too, benefit from it whether you want to face it or not.

I BEG G.M. to be more competetive and if you came to work with me for a day you would see that there is a LOT of waste that has nothing to do with The Union.We struggle to keep 25 year old machinery running.
But we do. And with much pride and hard work.


In closing, go ahead and go to school and learn from the people in the Ivory Tower of Acadamia. Then work for a summer doing some real work getting $5 per hour. Then maybe you will appreciate what the Union does for the common man.
Okay, I wan't trying to insult you personally, but since the gloves are off.

First, I once worked as a car audio installer, crawling "up under the dash of a car 400 times a day to install wiring," and I didn't get $25 per hour to do it. I know what it means to work. I worked my way through college, paying for it out of my own pocket. My parents didn't help with anything, not tuition, living expenses, nothing. I didn't even use governement subsidized loans until I got to law school and had no other choice.

Second, better worker conditions/benefits can come from:
1. Increasing the minimum wage, requiring health care, etc
2. OSHA and other workplace safety regulations.
3. Workers Compensation
4. Creative legislation (how about tying CEO compensation to worker pay?)
5. I could think of more, but I have other things to do.

Third, I'm not mad that you and your high school dropout buddies make as much as the average attorney who has spent seven years in post secondary education, racking up enormous debt. It does bother me that Unions use work preservation clauses, among other things, to prevent plant closings or changed work assignments even when such relocations are best for the company, and would ultimately create more jobs.

I am sure that you work very hard and take pride in what you do, but you don't need the union to do that. You work hard because you like to take pride in what you do. The Union conditions people to think that it is necessary, but it is not. I would much rather see a thriving GM with many more $20 per hour workers than a declining GM, paying $25-30 per hour to the workers that it hasn't laid off yet.
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top