The disconnect I see in all of these “Opel can’t save Saturn” opinions is this: the vast majority of US consumers do not know or care one whit about Opel and its “brand cachet”. The fact is, Saturn has a compeling line of cars for the first time since its inception. They “appear” different from other stablemates, have an interesting and consistent stying language, and even offer a few alternatives (some pending) for the Green crowd to induce warm fuzzies.

OK, you grew up around Opel and understand it to be the Chevrolet of Europe. I didn’t grow up with Opel, but I do know them fairly well (once coveting a Calibre), and still have some (perhaps misguided) sense that Opel is at minimum a reasonably high quality alternative to VW. Not a bad comparison in my mind, despite VW’s recent US bumblings.

Badge engineering on a global scale makes a ton of sense for GM, and gives us consumers truly unique product. I’m betting Opel WILL save Saturn, and by extension, Saturn will show that GM can build cars that people actualy want.

And just think, when those Saturn folks are ready to upgrade, as your father did, there’s a Buick or Cadillac dealer just waiting to help them…

My only disagreement with the above is that I think the villain was Pontiac, which felt threatened because it saw itself as the sporty division. The thing that makes me feel strongly that that is the case is that the ‘96 Pontiac Sunfire has exactly the same shape as the first gen Saturns, and looks like they simply tweaked the Saturn. The ‘96 Saturn really didn’t look like a Saturn at all, except in the most superficial way. Other than that, Petra is right on.

jthorner:
You could also say that the investment which was made to start up Saturn starved the breadwinner GM brands of much needed reinvestment.

The whole idea that the way to fix GM was by starting an entirely new independent division while at the very same time gutting the original divisions of their independence was idiotic from day 1. Roger Smith set GM down the path to disaster and the folks who have come along since him have not done much better.

But GM was not exactly a big success, prior to Saturn. And the original Saturns — one basic model — reached peak sales of nearly 300,000 in ‘94 or ‘95. That was a big success, and had GM allowed Satrn to hold to the original vision, and simply improve it, they’d probably be doing great. I would certainly still be driving one. But between tghe fact the fact that there are so many more compelling cars out there, and my having been totally soured on the brand due to their dumbing down, it’ll be a cold day in Hell…

Smith’s idea was to try something new–and something new included employee empowerment (for more on this, see this past weekend’s NYT Mag on Toyota’s success)–and let the rest of the company learn from it. In this, Smith was probably more visionary than any head of GM has been in the past half century.

Then, in ‘96, they dumbed it down, both in appearance and handling, so that you couldn’t tell whether it was a Tercel or a Hyundai whehter you were looking at it or driving it. All that was left to distinguish it were the warm and fuzzy dealer experience, and the plastic panels. There was no longer anything cool about it. And by ‘98 or so, that’s how people saw Saturn. I didn’t identify at all with the second (or later) gen saturns and theiur image, and so when people asked me–usually knowing I was a car nut–what I drove, I felt obliged to explain that the first gen Saturns had been practical yet sporty, and that’s why I bought the thing, and I certainly didn’t identify with what Saturn had become. Yet, I didn’t feel it was worth changing cars over this, so I ran the thing for a bit more than 11 years.

Here are the problems:

1. It’s a hatchback, not a sedan or coupe. Hatchbacks sell worse than sedans/coupes in the US.
2. Saturn will not longer have a compact sedan or coupe, the vehicles that have always defined the brand.
3. Because of #1 and #2, GM is replacing a vehicle (the Ion) that sells 100,000 units a year with one that they predict will sell between 20,000 and 40,000.
4. But the low sales in #3 is a good thing, because they will lose money on every European-built Astra they sell, mainly due to the weak dollar. If they sold more, they would lose more money.
5. Of course, Saturn has always lost money for GM since it was founded, so why break with tradition?

You note that you owned a first-gen Saturn vehicle but as the brand deteriorated you mentioned that you had to apologize for owning such a vehicle due to the reputation the brand was acquiring.
For some strange reason, I thought long and hard about your comment, because it triggered a visceral response in me where I thought “no one should have to apologize for the vehicle they drive”. While I’m certainly not trying to pick a bone with you on this matter, I wanted to get some thoughts on this, for in my view I would never dream of apologizing to anybody for the vehicle I own. In my case, I have owned an 86 Silverado and currently own a 00 Dakota. While the Chev was a hand-me-down from my dad, the Dakota I paid for with my hard-earned money.
I recall having some reservations about buying the Dodge due to reliability concerns of Chrysler products in general, but in the end I bought the truck because I wanted to, plain and simple. If anyone were to give me their negative input on what they thought of my truck or me owning such a vehicle, they’d be told where to go and how to get there in a big hurry.
It could just be a product of my environment and upbringing, where people don’t comment and question others’ vehicle purchases, but it always strikes me as odd when I hear about people “apologizing” for owning a particular vehicle.

The Aura is a sales disaster primarily because it doesn’t offer a 4 cylinder engine in a market where 70% of sales are 4 cylinder versions of the vehicle. By the time GM offers the Aura with a 4 cylinder and a 6 speed automatic (late 2007), it will be competing against the new Honda Accord.

Can the Astra do better? I don’t know, but they gotta do something. What is clear is that GM will not invest to design and build a new, high quality, small car just for sale here. That may be their biggest blunder.

Those Camry and Accord sales are piggy-backed off of old Corolla and Civic owners.

If there are no good, desirable, and affordable entry level cars at GM, they won’t be able to cultivate customers to sell them their high margin sedans.

The Astra, while a little on the old side, still is a good looker with decent performance and build quality, a much better proposition than the ION or the Cobalt. With so few hatchbacks and with the demise of the hatchback Focus, the Astra has a small field in which to compete.

Opel Ascona

It outhandled a BMW 2002 and was cheaper.

With a few mods…

Well, no. The Speedster came out well ahead of the current Elise, and it was definitely not a rebody of the old Elise.

There was nothing in the Speedster that had anything to do with the old Elise. It was merely built at Lotus because they had the capacity.

The new Elise, on the other hand, was a rebody of the Speedster. It does have an inferior Toyota engine (inferior compared to the 220bhp Opel Engine) for some reason though.

You could also say that the investment which was made to start up Saturn starved the breadwinner GM brands of much needed reinvestment.

The whole idea that the way to fix GM was by starting an entirely new independent division while at the very same time gutting the original divisions of their independence was idiotic from day 1. Roger Smith set GM down the path to disaster and the folks who have come along since him have not done much better.

Of course the rest of GM fought against having their entrails pulled out and fed to the new kid!

The car in the video I linked was the current Vectra – same headlights as the Aura. (the copyright police have gotten to it as they’re ruining YouTube – I need my Top Gear!).

Clarkson is right, the Speedster was a rebodied Lotus Elise. As for his driving, he’s doing pretty good 1:15 into this video of an M5 here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVz_iPW_WAU

As for The Stig. He’s rumored to be a Formula 1 driver. Yeah, he sucks too.

Saturn was originally an experiment, with the goal of building and selling cars in a very different way from what GM was accustomed to. And, like anything new and strange and potentially threatening to the status quo, GM’s other divisions did not take to this experiment too kindly. It is my belief that it was the fault of the other GM brands (mostly Chevrolet) that Saturn was starved and left to rot for the latter half of the ’90’s.

I have to wonder what GM’s plan C is for Saturn. Plan B was to import Opels in lieu of developing new product for the brand. But, if this idea proves to be a failure, what then? This plan has got late ’90’s Oldsmobile written all over it, and we all know how well that turned out.

The Video above is of the “1998″ Vectra. Not really relevant anymore. And he has also shown many a time (”The Stig” as well) that he is not competent in driving front-wheel powered cars. This is one of his other hang-ups. If isn’t Rear-wheel driven and British its got to be crap.

I've owned several Opels and own one now (Astra 1.9 CDTI 150). I've driven many a car (Audi A4/A3/A6, Golfs in many variants, BMW 1, 3 & 5 Series, Lots of Mercs including the new S500, AMG63 and more).

For some reason it's "accepted" that VW Golf and A3/A4 and BMW 1&3 are of great quality, certainly they are better than Opel. All VAG owners pay a premium here and look down on those who buy Opels. Thats how they "defend" their choice of buying a car that is no better but 20/30 % more expensive.

Same or better quality, as good or better driving, much more standard equipment and the Opels usually cost a lot less (when comparing Engine and equipment).

The morale of many in Europe being; The more You pay for less car the better it must be.

The first 3 titles for the Malibu reviews are:
“I don’t think I will buy another Chevy”
“Below Average”
“Agree w/Good Frosting, Bad Cake”

I think the owner reviefws are extremely helpful, because they give detail. I used them when I helped my girlfriend buy a car recently.

Quasimondo: Their competition (namely the Mitsubishi Eclipse, Acura Integra, and Toyota Celica) was much sportier with better handling, though.

DH: the only one of these cars that was among their competition–that is, a sedan or coupe that seats four and is fairly economical–was the Integra. That was the main car I was shopping the Saturn against. The SL2 (the higher end Saturn) handled better than the Integra RS, which was the integra that was equivalent in price.

I will begrudgingly admit that they did have the advantage of cultivating a ‘feel-good’ atmosphere among their owners, but when was the last time they’ve organized a nationwide gathering at their Spring Hill plant?

I didn’t give a damn about the feel-good thing. There was a wonderful “Zippy cartoon that I had pasted to my dashboard, where you see the Saturn owners with that glazed, cultsh look in their eyes, saying, “why don’t you join us for a meeting tonight at your local Saturn dealer,” and the last line is Zippy, saying “At least we know what planet they’re coming from.

We traded in a Honda Accord on that first SL sedan, and we traded in our last Saturn wagon on a Honda Pilot. Now, I couldn’t find something that satisfied me in a Saturn showroom if I tried. And we love our Pilot. We’ll probably drive Hondas for the rest of our lives. And while that’s good — it’s also too bad.

The news is pretty good about glossing over trivial matters such as accounting and finance. Ever read one of Detroit’s 10K reports?