Could They Sell This Today?

[RockJustRock]

O.K., Lincoln Mercury.

[Eric]

You have not driven a small turbo engine lately then. Small engines can make believable torque, and you're not going to find a V8 in anything that doesn't weigh as much as a small house today (excluding the exotic stuff, where frankly you should be shopping for a V12 anyway).

The turbo fours do sound like a vacuum cleaner in heat, no argument.

But hell, if you want fast? That's what bikes are for. You aren't going to go deep 9's in your absolutely reliable street car until you've spent 10x the money that it can be done on two wheels. So if you want fast on a budget, two wheels is the clear winner. If you want 'big torque' then buy a diesel. If you want a properly fast street car with 'the soundtrack' that you're so bent on about, then you need to open your wallet, and open it widely. Sorry, those days are done and over. They're not coming back no matter how loudly you cry about it.

Yup, If I had the funds, I'd build a factory five mk roadster (Shelby cobra) or the coupe with a new ford mustang 2.3 turbo 4. and a stick.
Heck bet because of the ford programing, you can do like they do and pipe that v8 sound into the car with the audio system. just like they do, even with the gt500's. Sure the 4 bangers sound odd, When you've grown up on the rump of a v8 with non-stock mufflers.

[Gateclyve Photographic]

The GTO was a perfectly fine car.

Apparently not enough buyers agreed.

Pontiac was doomed anyway.

There's been reams of analysis on the demise of Pontiac. No need to repeat it here. In short, it ceased building quality products that supported a viable brand persona. Some would say Pontiac ceased being "Pontiac" long before the last bean-counter-approved, committee-designed, badge-engineered vehicle bearing that nameplate was built, It was the proverbial death of a thousand cuts. .

Makes me wonder how Buick and Mercury are still hanging on.

FoMoCo canned Mercury years ago. Buick has been huge in China and was the foundation of GM. Thus, the decisionmakers at GM have determined that anything they could have done with one of the other dead mid-market nameplates could also be accomplished with Buick.

That being said, most consumers would probably have a difficult time concisely describing what Buick stands for.

The late S.I. Hayakawa would say the symbol "Buick" (or any other word or symbolic expression) has three meanings:

1. Denotation -- the specific objects bearing the nameplate.
2. Informative connotation -- what we all generally think the symbol "Buick" means (separately and in context with its immediate use) -- what it stands for.
3. Affective connotation -- how the symbol "Buick" as it is being applied makes us feel. How we value it.

A big task of all marketing is connecting the "tool" function of a product (i.e. features, functions and benefits) with the affective dimensions of it.

[squirrel]

Buick stands for Grandpa.

[Monster]

O.K., Lincoln Mercury.

Mercury is considered a defunct division of Ford, although it remains an active and registered trademark to at least 2025.

[Eric]

Buick stands for Grandpa.

Maybe here. Only reason Buick didn't get the axe was it sells big time in Asia.

[Gateclyve Photographic]

Buick stands for Grandpa.

Myopically killing the racing program and the Grand National/GNX/Type-T will do that.



But to be fair, Buick sells a variety of sort-of-youth oriented products. Grandpa don't need no Brembos . . . .

[Gateclyve Photographic]

Mercury is considered a defunct division of Ford, although it remains an active and registered trademark to at least 2025.

All the OEMs will keep renewing the trademarks on their defunct brands to preserve the licensing revenues and to make sure that we don't have "Plymouth", "Rambler" or "Oldsmobile" show up on some cheap Chinese import.

It does lead to some curious revivals, such as FCA putting the old, politically-incorrect AMC "Rebel" nameplate on a Ram and Willys and Overland on a few Jeeps.

[Gateclyve Photographic]

BTW, probably the most interesting automotive trademark disputes arose out of the government break-up of John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil monopoly . . . http://www.visualcapitalist.com/char...-standard-oil/


A whole slew of spin-off "baby Standards" (e.g. Mobil, Chevron, Conoco, SOHIO, Amoco, ARCO, Marathon . . . . ) each had rights to the "Standard Oil" trademarks The legal fighting over it became so intense that essentially everyone eventually had to stop using "Standard Oil" to prevent further lawsuits.

it got so ridiculous that Standard Oil Company of New Jersey . . . which used the ESSO brand . . . renamed itself and rebranded all its stations in the US as the computer-selected nonsense name EXXON (ESSO survived as a brand in Europe and other parts of the world).

But ExxonMobil maintains the Esso trademark, and it may at some point be coming back in the USA. (see link)

[RockJustRock]

I'm curious about Cadillac Performance. They just keep going on it. So far it is mostly recycled Chevy technology, priced waaaay too high for all but a select few buyers. But again somehow they just keep going. Interesting race cars too.

[squirrel]

somehow, I don't see Cadillac selling a 68 Roadrunner today.

[Gateclyve Photographic]

But neither of you said Cadillac "stands for Grandpa," so their racing program (not to mention a whole slew of very-pricey V-series high performance vehicles) may be having a positive effect on brand perceptions.

Luxury and near-luxury goods involve selling a lot of brand-image "sizzle" any how. Skivvies from Walmart do about the same thing as ones branded Tommy Hilfiger or Calvin Klein. . . .

[Monster]

I'm curious about Cadillac Performance. So far it is mostly recycled Chevy technology, priced waaaay too high for all but a select few buyers.

Presume you are referring to the 6.2L supercharged that is in the Camaro Z01 ?

[Gateclyve Photographic]

Presume you are referring to the 6.2L supercharged that is in the Camaro Z01 ?

The whole pushrod two-valve engine thing is a bit of a technological backwater compared to the specifications of even the most pedestrian European or Japanese competitors. Nonetheless, they're carding some decent numbers from it (and it's bootstrapped a bit in international motorsports by "balance of performance" adjustments and cubic-inch advantages).

[silver_bullet]

The whole pushrod two-valve engine thing is a bit of a technological backwater compared to the specifications of even the most pedestrian European or Japanese competitors. Nonetheless, they're carding some decent numbers from it (and it's bootstrapped a bit in international motorsports by "balance of performance" adjustments and cubic-inch advantages).

I.E. Biggest bang for the buck!