Jump to content

Extremely epic un-aired Pontiac commercial


jake91
 Share

Recommended Posts

I find it ironic since Pontiac shut down because people have conformed to japcrap. You know it's bad when people think a Honda Civic is a racecar and a Lexus RX is a Bentley.

 

Today there are no people... just uneducated masses... therefore Pontiac could not survive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it ironic since Pontiac shut down because people have conformed to japcrap. You know it's bad when people think a Honda Civic is a racecar and a Lexus RX is a Bentley.

 

Today there are no people... just uneducated masses... therefore Pontiac could not survive.

 

No, Pontiac shut down because of a failure on the part of GM's management. They ran the brand and the whole company info the ground. The Japanese cars became popular for a reason... GM was selling shitpile after shitpile and not doing anything about it. Let's compare the quality of a 2004 Chevy Malibu with a 2004 Toyota Camry or 2004 Subaru Legacy. There's a reason for everything.

 

I love my GMs. I like just about every brand out there. I have no real brand loyalty. My next car will probably be a Ford. I buy whatever I like, whether it is American, Japanese, Korean, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Pontiac shut down because of a failure on the part of GM's management. They ran the brand and the whole company info the ground.

 

I was trying to poke fun at the fact that a good majority believe only 2 major car companies exist... Toyota and Honda. Sometimes they will acknowledge Hyundai or Nissan but a good majority think GM still builds the Citation, Ford still builds the Pinto and Chrysler is still building K cars. And as far as VW goes, they see them just as bad as the American cars. It was a 1984 reference since people are blindly following bullshit.

 

and lets be real for a minute, Pontiac shut down not because GM wanted it shut down, but because Obama and his "Car Czar" forced them to. The original plan only got rid of Saab, Saturn and Hummer. A lot of people forget Obama wanted only Chevrolet and Cadillac to exist. They had to make business cases to keep Buick (successful in China) and GMC (low R&D with high profit margin) to continue existing. The whole high performance thing with Pontiac wasn't considered a "business case".

 

The Japanese cars became popular for a reason... GM was selling shitpile after shitpile and not doing anything about it. Let's compare the quality of a 2004 Chevy Malibu with a 2004 Toyota Camry or 2004 Subaru Legacy. There's a reason for everything.

 

Ok, GM makes one shitty ass car (the Citation) and all of a sudden that's all they build? That's what pisses me off about the situation. Sure GM made shit and shitty decisions in the 1980's, but not all their cars were shit. It took em a while but towards the late 80's they were making decent cars again. Not the best, but time has been nicer to GM built cars than Japanese cars... or if Japanese cars are soooooo good, then why is it that most Japanese cars don't make it to see 20 years of age? Where are the so much better than the Citation 80's Corolla and Civic? Because last time I checked, they were left at the junkyard in the late 90's.

 

In 2004, all those cars were cheaply built. You can tell in the Toyota mostly. Subaru has always been a different kind car company so throwing that into the mix is like comparing a Hyundai Excel to a Cadillac Fleetwood. Completely different cars. But I'll bite... The Toyota has cheap materials, plastic interiors, engines that burned oil (actually Toyota had a big issue with oil starvation, moreso than Chrysler's famed 2.7), easy to break door handles and bodies that rusted quickly. The Malibu on the other hand had bad styling, plastic interiors, decent engines (Ecotec and 3500), and decent body materials that didn't rust as quickly. Perhaps the fit and finish wasn't there but I know many that would prefer it over a pos Camry. The only good looker in your example was the Subaru, but that's not saying much because Camry and Legacy buyers are completely different people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama's "car czars" wouldn't have had a chance at Pontiac if GM weren't so thoroughly in the toilet by then.

 

GM was in the toilet because they built crap they couldn't sell, because the public had been screwed so often that they were gun-shy of GM (and the other domestics.) You think GMs only junk car was the Citation? Go back ten years...Vega. Go back eleven more years...Corvair--the car that "made" Ralphie Nader. Going the other way: Cadillac Cimmaron--a Cavalier with power door locks and windows. More realistically, look at the horsepower numbers of the later '70s and throughout the '80s. Look at the durability problems of the first five years or so of the Turbo 700 transmission even with the pathetic engine power produced. Consider the patheticness of the Turbo 200--so fabulously weak that they popped like clockwork at 50K miles. Consider that GM got sued (and lost) for "cheating" Oldsmobile customers by installing the "inferior" Chevrolet engine--and GMs reaction where all engines were suddenly considered "corporate" so GM could shove them willy-nilly into any vehicle. How about the crank-breaking, head-cracking Olds 5.7L Diesel? (Which, to hear some folks talk, suffered from little beyond a proper water-separating fuel filter to prevent injector pump corrosion and loss of precise fuel control.) Olds Diesel--most responsive car sold...from zero to three miles per hour. Look at EVERY Buick V-8 and V-6 with an aluminum oil pump, an overhung distributor drive gear, a sh!tty front cam bearing design, and no oil pressure at idle--and not much more revved-up. Think about the Cadillac 4.2L disaster, the Cadillac V8-6-4 variable-displacement nightmare. Engines built to be CHEAP, with all the quality engineered out to save production costs.

 

Consider Saturn, whos only real purpose was to screw the consumer by being the first brand to introduce "no haggle" pricing (i.e., pay what we ask or fuck off.) Saturn was the wedge intended to drive that concept across the industry.

 

YES, the only reason Buick exists is because it's popular in China. It's the second brand I'd have shit-canned if I were in charge and had to reduce redundant marques in the GM stable (the first to go would have been Saturn.) Chevy, Pontiac, Olds and (maybe) Cadillac would still be with us, but more distinct from each other than they were.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I watched about half of the commercial, and had to close the web page. Epic? No. I'd call it arrogant and deceitful. Full of itself. An advertisement parody of advertising.

Edited by Schurkey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama's "car czars" wouldn't have had a chance at Pontiac if GM weren't so thoroughly in the toilet by then.

 

GM was in the toilet because they built crap they couldn't sell, because the public had been screwed so often that they were gun-shy of GM (and the other domestics.) You think GMs only junk car was the Citation? Go back ten years...Vega. Go back eleven more years...Corvair--the car that "made" Ralphie Nader. Going the other way: Cadillac Cimmaron--a Cavalier with power door locks and windows. More realistically, look at the horsepower numbers of the later '70s and throughout the '80s. Look at the durability problems of the first five years or so of the Turbo 700 transmission even with the pathetic engine power produced. Consider the patheticness of the Turbo 200--so fabulously weak that they popped like clockwork at 50K miles. Consider that GM got sued (and lost) for "cheating" Oldsmobile customers by installing the "inferior" Chevrolet engine--and GMs reaction where all engines were suddenly considered "corporate" so GM could shove them willy-nilly into any vehicle. How about the crank-breaking, head-cracking Olds 5.7L Diesel? (Which, to hear some folks talk, suffered from little beyond a proper water-separating fuel filter to prevent injector pump corrosion and loss of precise fuel control.) Olds Diesel--most responsive car sold...from zero to three miles per hour. Look at EVERY Buick V-8 and V-6 with an aluminum oil pump, an overhung distributor drive gear, a sh!tty front cam bearing design, and no oil pressure at idle--and not much more revved-up. Think about the Cadillac 4.2L disaster, the Cadillac V8-6-4 variable-displacement nightmare. Engines built to be CHEAP, with all the quality engineered out to save production costs.

 

Hahaha oh man, the Vega. Now that was a shitty car straight from factory. The funny thing is that in their respective eras, the issues were typcal. It's like saying the Impala had pisspoor handling when it came out new in 1967. But what car in that year didn't have depressive handling? But yeah, I always mention the Citation because it's GM's equivalent to the Pinto. The car was bad mechanically from the get go. The funky styling probably didn't help either.

 

As far as the Cimarron goes, it wasn't a bad car mechanically but it was a bad corporate choice because it just wasn't meant to be a Cadillac and it showed pretty badly IMO past the Iron Duke the J Body wasn't a bad car. Most of them are still running around. The Cimarrorn believe it or not are still out and about. Maybe not plentiful, but most compact cars are seen as disposable anyways. But you'd have an easier time finding a 1987 Cimarron than a 1987 Accord (the one with the pop up headlights). Im not trying to defend the Cimarron but my point is this: Sure Detroit made shit, Detroit probably built shit for 20 years but compared to what are they shit? I mean if we draw out every company, there's some that make the VEGA look good (Mitsubishi, I'm looking at you). Even Porsche was known for shit (928, 944), and the French cars were so shitty that they had to withdraw from the market. A lot of people forget Fiat was absolute junk too. They forget how quickly Japanese cars rusted to hell. and some still do.... but noooo A 4L60E is still the weak 700RE from 1981. Hell, the new 6 speeds are those shitty THM200s from the 80's according to some people.

 

To me it's not defending shitty decisions and shitty designs but lets not put one company on a pedestal because they were all equally bad in their time. Like I said earlier, Toyota had oil sludge issues way before Chrysler made the 2.7. Honda had transmission issues as well, most of them are known to grenade themselves. Mitsubishi is junk, has always been junk, and probably part of the reason anything Chrysler with a Mitsubishi engine went to the junkyard... and the irony is that they decide to build a car with the worst of both worlds... a shitty Mitsubishi engine and a shitty Chrysler transmission with the shitty Chrysler water based paint they had on the Neon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...