Pontiac to Be Killed off - Death to the Muscle Car

GM is to end the Pontiac line of autos.

General Motors Corp., facing the threat of a bankruptcy filing if it can’t meet a June 1 U.S. deadline, will preserve the GMC truck line and drop its 83-year- old Pontiac brand as part of a government-led recalibration of its business plan, people familiar with the decision said.

The Detroit automaker will keep the GMC, Chevrolet, Cadillac and Buick brands, after a review that included profitability with the Obama administration’s automotive task force, said the people, who asked not to be named because the decisions have not been announced. GM may reveal next week the end of the make that produced the Grand Prix, Bonneville and Firebirds, they said.

So, is the Pontiac a political casualty to green jobs? The reason I ask this is the quote:

“Pontiac was the first real muscle car and the government doesn’t want muscle cars,” favoring fuel-efficient models, Wolkonowicz said. “I’m sad to see this brand go, it’s truly iconic.”

For killing the Pontiac, GM just got $2 Billion more in bail out money.

Subject Meta: 

Forum Categories: 

If by 'muscle cars' one

If by 'muscle cars' one means 're-badged small FWD Chevies and a Saturn knock-off', then yes by god Pontiac is a muscle-car brand. Sad to see it go for old time's sake, but in real terms that brand's been dead for decades.


I think it's a bummer they are going to kill Saturn. Their problem is their cars suck, they are also "bland" kind of so middle of the road, who wants to buy them. But their business model is the thing I feel very sad to go.

Hey, I agree, Pontiac means "shit" in terms of quality but they are the ones who made the muscle car and I noticed the focus on that symbolism in the article.

Whatever it takes

Honestly, while looking into all this, given the situation they're in, they might as well kill off all but one or two of the brands. I can see keeping GMC, and perhaps Chevy. They need to start from scratch. Originally, as I remembered, Saturn was supposed to be their "Japanese car company" in that it was going to follow the same scheme akin to Toyota or Honda. It was supposed to be a "better quality" car company or something along those lines, where they listened to car owners. Of course, what ended up happening was that Saturn just became another marque of GM. A shame really, because it had a potential of being a game changer.

But like Robert and Anonymous eluded to, the brands have lost a lot of their reputation. You know what you get with a Chevy, and you know what you get with a GMC truck. The problem with GM was that they wanted to provide everything to everyone almost all at once. Concentrate on one brand, perfect it with your customers and then move on to the next.

Adios Smokey and the Bandit

Goodbye Firebird. It' sad to see one of the muscle car brands go.

Well, that is something that will be sad news ...

... to people who are more interested in getting their jollies than in the deaths of American service men and women sent overseas in a vain effort to try to nail down the last big source of cheap oil so Americans can keep driving "muscle cars".

burying the decedent

People need time to grieve for the decedent.

The obvious answer to the death of the muscle car is to create an alternative energy vehicle which can generate so much love and enthusiasm.

It is possible to innovate cool, awesome power cars that don't destroy the planet and create a new culture...

but give people their time to grief. This is part of American culture, such as "NASCAR" is.

I personally hate NASCAR but there are swaths of America that live by NASCAR. Ya have to create something they can seriously get into. Poo pooing on their culture won't do it, we need something that gives that same sense of identity, fun, excitement as what the big 3 did in creating the "car culture".

When weighted against the deaths in Iraq ...

... when weighed against the tens of millions to die in climate chaos, if we are lucky, no, I do not see that it is sane to give them any weight whatsoever.

That does not mean that I take them lightly.

I didn't expect less

For I suspect you are a granola creature. ;) I'm just trying to say that the "car culture" needs a "love object" replacement. It's all sales, marketing, image so it can be done, taking into account why people "love their cars" and coming up with a "new love".

Some of the upcoming electric technology will be able to astound, rival...it's just like people who "love their Macs". You can create a competitive technology which will be adopted but it's gotta "wow" and "awe" in terms of total "awesomeness".

like just take trains for a moment. One could have a smoking car that is completely isolated from the rest of the train. Politics will dictate not to promote smoking, but the reality is a certain amount of the population is going to want it to use public transport for that length of time (think the time of a nicotine withdrawal period and that's about it).

Another example would be the "doggie car". People want to travel with their pets. the pet is a family member. So imposing "no pets" means they simply are not going to use the transport.

Same thing with eating. They want their colas and snacks.

I'm trying to imply to get new technology adopted, they need to deal with how people are instead of how they "should be".

Muscle car = Chevy Camaro


They're asking for another four years -- in a just world, they'd get 10 to 20 ~~ Dennis Kucinich