(first posted 10/18/2011)
Earlier in this space we traced the promising birth (and rapid maturation) of GM’s first new nameplate since the depression. The car was the Saturn and in its earliest days, it offered the hope that a new way of designing, building and marketing cars would revitalize its parent company. For a moment, at the pinnacle of success and acceptance, Saturn looked like the long sought answer to GM’s continuing failure in small cars. But as we’ll see, the descent of the division was a slow, painful experience that revealed that the old GM way was not dead, just dormant.
Milestones (and milestone cars) seemed to fly by for the half decade after launch as Saturn went from one product triumph to the next. Management knew that the safe styling of the first generation cars would age quickly and work began to keep the line up to date. A wagon was added in 1992 and by the end of the millennium, the company was celebrating job number two million. But as we have learned, there are no permanent victories in the auto business and just at the apogee of success, Saturn would begin a long, tragic fall to irrelevancy and failure. The seeds of the descent had been sowed at the founding, but it was only after the car was history that we understood that part of our narrative.
Those seeds began to sprout when Saturn was ready for a new model series. In the fall of 1999, the long awaited new Saturns began rolling off the line at Spring Hill and in Wilmington, Delaware. The car from Wilmington was the fork in the road that took GM away from the look and “feel “ of the original SL series. The all new mid size L series cars took GM back to the discredited practice of trying to pass off a model meant for another market to U.S. buyers.
The donor car was the Opel Vectra and it carried the same baggage that had sank many a GM euro spec model- it was poorly adapted to North America. The V-6 that GM had cut and pasted in to the equally ill fated Catera (CC here) , was also installed in the L series, with the same unhappy results. Fortunately, buyers could also spec the Ecotech 2.2L four which proved to be a good engine in a bad car. The L series was a major disappointment for GM and its failure began the slide to oblivion for its maker that ended in October 2009.
Another sign that Saturn was falling victim to the internal politics of GM was the introduction of the the Vue in 2002. SUV’s were taking off explosively then and even though the traditional Saturn owner was not a trend hopper, the project went ahead. More body sharing: The Vue was a clone of the Chevy Equinox , Pontiac Torrent and Opel Antara. The image that Saturn had worked so hard to nurture was being destroyed bit by bit as the company’s cars lost the unique character that had attended its founding. Even the company’s thermoformed, dent resistant plastic bodies were sacrificed on the altar of cost reduction. The accountants (and some militant shareholders) were demanding that Saturn’s massive investment start showing a return and executives in the executive suite at GM (most from the finance side) readily agreed.
2003 finally saw a replacement for the seminal SL series and the new car (dubbed the Ion) was another let down for loyal Saturn customers. The styling was an incoherent mish mash of opposing themes and weird details. A five speed autobox was added to the drivetrains on offer as well as a CVT that proved somewhat troublesome. The standard engine was the 2.2 Ecotech (later shared with the Cobalt) with a larger 2.4L version optional.
Oddball details (a center mounted instrument cluster, hard, uncomfortable seats) took lots of brickbats from owners and critics and the engine was criticized as being noisy and rough. The car shared lots of chassis hardware with the new Cobalt from Chevrolet and the accountants made sure that the interior bits were made from the hardest, cheapest plastic that they could find. By now, Saturn’s small car was no longer among the class leaders. Only the sterling customer service of the early days remained.
Denouement– After the failure of the Ion, Saturn increasingly became a dumping ground for GM models that would further diminish the reputation of what had been a vibrant, confident company just a few years before. The new for 2005 Relay (above) was an obvious clone of the horrible Chevy Uplander/Pontiac Montana and showed that the freefall at Saturn was gaining momentum. It also signified the loss of clout at the corporate level needed to maintain Saturn’s unique character. Then the hammer fell from the UAW: In 2004 the unions “special relationship” with the company was dissolved and for all practical purposes, the Saturn experiment had ended.
There would be a flicker of excitement when the company trotted out the Sky roadster in early 2006, but the car was another badge job (shared with Pontiac’s Solstice) that looked good and sold poorly. By this time, Saturn was on life support, with the final models little more than renamed Opel’s. As the economy crashed beginning in early 2007, parent GM began publicly questioning the need for so many brands (including Saturn) under one corporate roof.
The end came on October 1, 2009, when Saturn production ended at all facilities.
By the end, the company line was down to the Outlook crossover and a couple of Opel models (Aura and Astra) that had been drafted to run out the string. Saturn’s original mission had long since been lost. Only the autopsy remained.
What went wrong ? How could a company with a dynamite product and excellent customer service possibly fail after just a few model design cycles ? Let’s discuss.
Saturn was doomed from the beginning. GM invested too much money in the concept at the outset. It was like building a million dollar mansion…in a neighborhood where the average rent was 300 dollars a month. The enormous outlay could never be recouped. And by the mid 2000’s with GM’s market share shrinking with every ten day sales report, the Saturn experiment was a luxury that the company could no longer afford.
Also, Saturn was a “chimney” inside GM. The company assembled its own bodies and engines at Spring Hill and after its favored status began to wear off, had to compete with other divisions for attention and capital from the fourteenth floor. The first sign of trouble was in 2003, when its ad budget was cut in half . Another clue came when there was no homecoming in 2004. The company flat out lied when it explained that the trip was too far for most customers to travel. (despite good attendance at the previous two events as above) And finally the mediocre, badge engineered L series was another “top down” GM program from the bad old days. After early 2006, the parent company was in such a freefall that it couldn’t even save itself, much less an experiment that might never show a real money in / money out profit.
GM itself declared bankruptcy in June of 2009 and the fire sale of corporate assets began. Pontiac, Saturn, Saab and Hummer were cut loose as the company desperately sought to save something from the wreckage that had been the old GM. With the end of the old order, Saturn was shopped around and as is usually the case with a failing car company, wild schemes and trial balloons were floated, but every tire kicking “Lookie Lou” backed out. Thus Saturn expired and is now being airbrushed from GM’s corporate past. It is not too much to say that the operation was a success – but the patient died.
Editor’s Postscript: GM never released a definitive final accounting of its accumulated/total losses on its Saturn boondoggle, but several analysts came up with a range based on various GM filings and such. Their estimates were up to $12 billion dollars, making Saturn not only one of GM’s Deadliest Sins ever, but one of the biggest corporate blunders ever too.
As an owner of four Saturns over my driving life (’92 SL1, ’98 SL2, ’07 Ion3 2.4, and ’07 Vue AWD), I can agree with your article. Things went downhill after GM decided to start rebadging other GM products instead of having unique models.
I currently have an ’07 Vue AWD with the Honda 3.5 V6 in it. While it is noisy inside and has a cheap plastic interior, it’s very reliable and as peppy as hell with that engine. Vue’s had the plastic body panels up until the redesign in ’08. The reason I was told was that because of the high price of oil, it was a lot cheaper just to use steel. I suppose the fact that it was a rebadged Opel Antara after the redesign played a part too. In that redesign, they gave NA a smaller, less practical, and less powerful vehicle than it’s predecessor with even more questionable styling. How could it fail? 🙂
My favourite of all my Saturns is still the ’92 I had as my first car. It was the only one for miles and stood out just the right amount for a 17 year-old. 🙂
Same story here. Loved the SL’s that we owned. They worked well and drove for a long time. Also had a 2007 vue that was Hondaized and had no problems with it. Granddaughter with an ion and the rotten luck with a 2002 vue (identical with the one in the picture) sickened me on them but it was about the time the company died.
I think that GM snatched defeat from the very jaws of victory here. Since I have two old chevies I can’t say I won’t ever drive GM but I sure don’t intend to buy a new one.
Saturn was an expensive investment yet it only churned out small cars at a time when the small car market was shrinking and the market shifted towards ueber-profitable SUVs. In the market it found itself in, it would have been a miracle to have pulled off a profit within the time Saturn existed.
The market shifted from small cars to SUVs back to small cars, with hybrids getting all the investments and attention, then back again away from small cars. No one has a crystal ball. When Saturn was being committed into existence, many experts predicted a future for small cars in a world of high gasoline prices. What other reason would such a hide bound corporation like GM risk so much if there wasn’t a strong belief that creating a new small car brand would return the investment?
It looked like a good bet in the 1980s, post Jimmy Carter and oil crisis. When Saturn was born, the US was in a severe recession that many didn’t see a way out of. No one foresaw a return to big cars and big trucks during the next 20 years. No one foresaw a profitable SUV boom with giant profits, or GM would have probably put the investment into HUMMER earlier.
So, GM put a multi-billion dollar investment into a shrinking market. It was amazing that Saturn lasted as long as it did.
It was amazing that Saturn lasted as long as it did.
Well, if you keep throwing enough money at something, like the perpetually money-losing Saturn, one can keep things going a long time. Until the money runs out, that is… GM lost how may billions trying to keep Saturn alive? Depends on which numbers you believe/like best, but I’ve heard it was somewhere between $3.5 and $7 billion.
Can’t hear you for the whooshing sound of all those zeroes going past……
There is a lot of Saturn Bashing going on here but I live in Seattle and see tons of old SL’1s SL’2s, and Vue’s running around here can’t have been that bad
I long believed that the 1991 Saturn should have been the 1991 Chevrolet Cavalier. Even in the 1980’s, I thought Saturn was a mistake. The only comment in the article above that I disagree with is about the Aura being an Opel. My understanding is that the Aura was a Pontiac G6 styled to look like an Opel.
The Aura wasn’t a direct badge-job like the Astra was, but it was based on the Vectra. Of course, they both shared their platform (Epsilon) with the G6, as well as the Malibu and Saab 9-3.
Exactly.
The Vectra was a nice one, and the 9-3 also decent. I am curious on why the L was such a disaster.
I see TTAC-style GM bashing going on here. The role of dealers has to play a much bigger role. The Aura and Astra seemed like very decent cars. And I saw a lot of Saturn Vues in Washington, DC.
The Ion does seem pretty bad, and the article explains that. I never saw the Relay.
Nonetheless, the L, the Aura, and the Astra all seemed like decent cars
In 2003, what should have Saturn been? The Nissan Versa? The Honda Fit?
Well, opinions vary, but the Vectra B (’95-’02) on which the L was based has always been considered sort of a disappointment in Europe as it provided little improvement over its predecessor while competition had moved on, at least so by the motoring press (His Hamminess Jeremy Clarkson in particular). It was a fairly decent car but did not excel in anything except being the most average car on the road.
Exporting something that’s nothing special to begin with to a different market with different standards without adding any redeeming qualities (doing the rather opposite by turning a fairly nice-looking car into, well, something else) generally is not a very good idea. For the same reason, your average American GM-mobile won’t sell in Europe either.
The Astra was a good car to begin with on the other hand, although it arrived simply too late. Was GM trying to turn Saturn into its own VW in an act of desperation?
On a funnier note: the Aura was based on the Vectra C, which originally did not look too similar but was then facelifted with the exact same front end because the original did not sell too well (didn’t help a lot).
I think the failure of the Vecta B is related to how good the original vecta was. Expectations management and all that. I have a 900NG saab. With all the faults, it is truly class leading…for 1985. The 9-3 has been tinkered with enough to hold steady, although nobody thinks it is class leading.
Problems with Astra were also classic GM powertrain mismatch.
It’s also important to note that the entire D-segment (biggish family sedans) was on the decline in Europe by then. It was already being hammered from below by increasingly competent C-segment models, which offered similar or great practicality and were cheaper, and from above by downmarket versions of the BMW 3-Series, C-Class Mercedes, and Audi A4.
I don’t think there was anything particularly WRONG with the contemporary Vectra, but it was a pretty generic middle-of-the-road repmobile, at a time when being a generic repmobile was becoming increasingly deadly. For similar money, family buyers looking for space could get a clever C-segment MPV, people looking for an entertaining drive could get a competent C-segment hatchback, and status-seekers could forgo a few toys for a four-cylinder A4 or 3-Series. Even D-segment cars that tried to be a little more interesting, like the Nissan Primera, got hammered quite badly. It’s noteworthy that a bunch of those cars (including the Primera and the Peugeot 406/407) are now extinct.
When I joined my current employer in 2001, all our sales reps were driving Nissan Primera or Pulsar wagons…except for the poor guy who joined when I did and received a 2001 Holden (nee Opel/Vauxhall) Vectra B wagon.
Not a bad looking car, but when I drove it one weekend, it proved to be the worst car I’d ever driven: awful controls, poor quality, lousy plastics, and the most attrocious interior space-efficiency.
The worst part was the lack of room in the driver’s footwell – I’m average height and build, and wear size 8 shoes; when releasing the clutch or brake pedals, they came up so far that my feet jammed between the pedals and the underside of the dashboard. I had a slight panic with this at one stage, and while wrenching my foot free I also successfully ripped the lower dash panel off.
I had owned three mid-80s Ford Sierra wagons during the early 1990s, and the Vectra felt like it was designed to compete with the Sierra, yet was released 13 years after the Sierra and was still inferior. That GM felt it suitable to use as a Saturn says a lot about their corporate direction…
I was just looking at a 2014 I think 2013 at the oldest Tahoe with every option in it, and the radio was the exact same as the 9 year old Saturn I have. It was just ok to start with, but to put it into a basically new vehicle….. come on, that is why gm was Crap. You don’t put a cheap stereo system that was used ten years ago in a 50k vehicle. I noticed that, the 2015 craptiva as I call it finally has a different radio, but is basically still a vue. I deliver cars as my job. Literally drive hundreds of cars 2 miles a day. I don’t expect a completely new interior design every year, but from car to car and price range to price range, yes. What I’ve noticed and I could be wrong or right, but Toyota seems to take things that they use in lexus? Whatever the other brand is, and add it to the cheaper Toyota cars, while GM has yet to figure this out. For example the Chevy cruze and the captiva both have bad steering, my 9 year old Saturn steers slightly better. While the Nissan suvs and cars have whatever system is in the Infiniti , the cars handle the same almost. The sentra I think it’s called drives like a new car should. The same with Toyota cars. Yet I get into a gm vehicle and it steers like a 1980s suburban. Come on. The transmissions Are also a joke. the cheapest smallest Nissan has a transmission like a cruze. I actually dropped off the Infiniti model and next dropped off the same car basically from Nissan. Almost no difference between the two for driving, except that the Infiniti obviously had a way better interior design and rode slightly better. A 2015 Malibu has no rear camera while most other cars do. Yet the 2015 suburban I drive around work in has 360 radar telling me all kinds of information and a backup camera. So my point is GM seems to trickle down old crap parts and technology into cheaper models. While others do it with the parts that matter, does the stereo system in the Nissan sound anywhere close to the Infiniti, no, but the cars steers if not exactly then almost the same. I liked the cruze I really like it in fact, it was going to be my starter car. But I cannot ignore the fact that the transmission seems to be one they stole from the 2006 ion I drive. And I’m looking for something that I can pull out into traffic in, not make a lot of noise and go nowhere fast in, I want to be going 35 with fast acceleration, no have the car literally do what amounts to nothing while going 60 and hitting the 70 mph zone, or do nothing but seemingly get confused about what to do, jump through gears and after a few seconds find some half assed power to slowly bring me to speed while getting on the highway. This is GMs problem to this day when you can get so much more from the other brand, why drive around in 10 year old mechanically cars? The impalla drives great has a transmission that works, even though it’s basically the same as the Cadillac they make. The Malibu is enough to get by with, not the same but good enough. A Volkswagen passat sadly will probably be the car I choose, it’s simple looking, but when I hit the gas, I go somewhere. I understand that the cruze is not meant to be a top of the line Chevy but when the very bottom of the stack from other companies are the same as a cruze in driveability, that is why people go to other brands, the only Ford that is like that is the focus. Too much power trying to get put on the pavement by a pos transmission. I kind of rambled on, but he’ll this page is 4 years old.
I purchased my L300 early in 2001. It is now over 11 years old and has been a paragon of reliability. I also got lucky in that the seat fits me so well that every year on my non-stop drive from Toronto to Nova Scotia (depending on traffic and road construction delays about a 17 or 18 hour drive) I exit the car with no complaint of stiffness, soreness or unease. Not every person that purchased an L series Saturn sucumed to the negative and somewhat uninformed trashing that this car has been tarred with. I still see a lot of them on the road. I also take issue with those who claim that it is simply a re-badged Vectra. nothing could be further from the truth. It was developed from that platform but, in terms of commonality, it has much more in common with the concurrent Saab 95. It too ran with a streched and widend Vectra platform.
So true, so true. A former co-worker in a former company left said company after buying her Saturn and was so enamored of it she went to work selling Saturns! She did fairly well, I believe.
I was never a fan of Saturn, ironically, until the Astras came along. Finally! I said, something to get excited about, especially that sharp 3-door hatch, which I fell in love with but never looked at closely or drove.
The Ion? What a mess. I remember a comment about the last-gen Sebring sedan being cobbled together from leftover Ion parts in reference to that roofline!
I drove one this past summer at the local CarMax. Absolutely loved it! The reason I didn’t buy? I’m currently in the tail end of saving mode for my next car (shopping starts 2 January), and didn’t have all the money together at the time. Watched the car sit between two local CarMaxes all summer, finally had enough to consider buying it . . . . . . . .and found that someone had beat me to it two days earlier. Definitely regret not buying that 3 year old, even though I was (still am) saving up for a new car.
I always thought that Saturn was one more proof of how GM screwed up the company as it slowly centralized its management and eliminated the autonomy of the car divisions. In its early years, Saturn had been like one of the GM divisions of old, with lots of autonomy, its own assembly plant, and a unique product. But slowly, the 14th floor turned Saturn into just another automotive brand, another outlet for corporate products.
I probably harp on this too much, but when GM had 5 separate and autonomously run auto divisions, it built a company that was the envy of the world. When it started to manage itself like Ford or Chrysler (a single top-down central authority) it basically became like Ford and Chrysler, only without the appealing products. So, maybe 30 years after it happened everywhere else in the company, Saturn lost its reason to be, becoming the new Oldsmobile.
Wasn’t the Aura the second of the cars on the same platform as the G6, LaCrosse and Malibu? I thought that it was an attractive car, much moreso than the G6. But after renting a G6, I could see why it did not take off better. And it was just like the 80s again: which set of grilles and taillights did you like better when choosing between 4 versions of the same car.
One thing about the Ion that was particularly sad was when Car & Driver had their first full test of it they actually proclaimed it “The most disappointing all new American car in ten years” Ouch! They were ready to roll the Cobalt out as a very similar car but they ended up delaying it for more than a year while they doctored it up to not be an epic fail like the Ion.
“…roll the Cobalt out as a very similar car but they ended up delaying it for more than a year while they doctored it up to not be an epic fail like the Ion.”
I had a Cobalt as a rental car for a couple of weeks just after they debuted (then and now, I am an unapolagetic cheapskate),and it was the worst driving experience that I ever had. Maybe they got better later on,but when I got home from that trip, I realized why the company that built it was in such dire straits.
If you every drove a pre-facelift Ion you would understand… Imagine the Cobalt with an even worse interior and absolutely no refinement. The sad part is they had a good platform as one drive in an Astra made Perfectly clear, but they dumbed them down for mericans’… Though beyond the nice fit and finish and the good handling the Astra was totally unsuited to this country
One year, visiting my in-laws, we decided we didn’t have to plan for hauling four adults, Thanksgiving dinner fixings and extra folding chairs a hundred miles, so we DIDN’T rent our usual fullsize car (we got a white Ford Crown Victoria one year…what a blast having everybody move out of the left lane while Grandpa quivered in fear in the back seat…”we’re going to die!”
We rented a Chevrolet Cobalt instead, and it was pretty poor. Then I offered to take Grandpa’s Saturn Ion to fill it with gas. It was worse, and that didn’t even take into account the stupid speedometer in the center of the dash that just SCREAMED ” Too cheap to make two dashes for left and right drive.
Did they even make Saturns with RHD?
Central instruments seemed to be a (deservedly) minor interior-design fad about then.
I’d concur with your Cobalt experience. That and its HHR cousin (built on the Cobalt platform IIRC) were always the rental cars you got stuck with if you arrived too late to get the good stuff. (Side note: Driving a Crown Vic rental this week–one of the last 2011s to be built, I guess. Apparently they weren’t all reserved for LEOs.) HHRs have become the new official pizza-delivery vehicle, and the small-business vehicle for those who don’t buy Transit Connects. (Which means they’re dirt-cheap.)
I did have an ION rental once, and it was almost completely unmemorable. GM could have just called it “CAR”. And I have only ever seen one Saturn Astra in the wild.
My wife had an HHR as a rental this summer for about a week and a half. I never suspected that she knew so many curse words. Kind of exciting, actually.
“GM could have just called it “CAR”. “
Or “Classic”…
I had a Classic for a couple weeks as well, after they’d quit calling it the Malibu. It too was as generic as they come, the perfect vehicle for rental fleets, which of course is why it was still around.
I almost think that some of the fleet queens would sell just as well if they were totally de-branded. “OK Sir, we have you in a mid-size for this week, will that be OK?” “A mid-size what?” “Just a mid-size.”
I always thought GM should have called the Classic the Chevy Biscayne. Or, if you insist on a midsize name, the Chevelle 300 Deluxe.
Ha! I annoy my wife by describing Kia Optimas (previous gen) as Cars. They should be rebadged as “Kia Car,” or “Car Si” or whatever. All lettering should be in Helvetica.
Having driven both, I would easily take an HHR over a Transit Connect (my present work vehicle, provided by my employer). The HHR at least can get out of it’s own way, and doesn’t have the aerodynamics of a brick at highway speeds. As an urban delivery vehicle, I suppose the TC would be OK. But, on the highway, it’s a slug. At the legal speed limit It constantly downshifts, whether up hills or travelling into the wind. Gets worse mileage than the cargo Uplander it replaced (20 vs. 23 MPG, 2.0L I-4 vs. 3.9L V-6). Doors can (all at once) ONLY be locked or unlocked with the remote. If you’re up front and want to let a co-worker into the back while the thing is running, you are forced to use the remote. And don’t lose your key, or wipe out a TPMS sensor when one of your crummy Czech tires shreds at 3000 miles – spares come from Turkey, where this turkey is assembled, and can take weeks to show up.
The rental HHR I drove had the same 2.2L as my 2004 Olds Alero, drove and handled quite nicely, had no problems keeping up with traffic (even fully loaded), and got decent mileage.
I had a rental Cobalt in 2007 (so it must have been a 2006 model), as I was in between personal cars (my ’92 Sable on life support) and couldn’t find a good deal on my next one. I had to commute between states a lot though, so for about 7 months I was a loyal Hertz customer. Even though I was really in the market for a 15+ year old runner with minimal needs up front, this was my chance to sample new cars, and I very much enjoyed that period in my life, going through more vehicles in a 7 month span than a lotta people do in 10 years. My goal was to try everything.
Oh, and I was beating the heck out of all those cars of course, lol.
The Cobalt was the one that started it all, that was the first rental, and switching to it from a ’92 Sable wasn’t actually at all bad (shows you how technology progressed), a FWD vs a newer FWD, Cobalt won hands down.
But then came a Ford Focus from the same generation, and it was soooooooooooo much better than the Cobalt (steering, torque, suspension, stereo, everything). That’s when I first appreciated the abysmalness of the 21st century GM econoclass hell.
From the same class I later sampled the Nissan Sentra (a 2007 model I believe) and it kicked both Americans’ butts with a vengeance. That was it for the bottom of the barrel, the rest of my rides were mid- and fullsize which I understandably was far more curious to get to know, but as far as the small cars went, the Cobalt was pretty awful.
Oh, and my only recollection of a Saturn was riding in my college buddy’s 2001 (or maybe 2002) coupe, with the manual trans worn to death, barely shifting and banging (now, THAT was what I’d call “banging” – not what my current AOD does), and the poor thing trashed up inside so bad I didn’t wear my good clothes when he and I would go out to a pool hall in his car.
Thats not encouraging while having never driven a Cobalt or its ilk I did have a Sentra/Tiida rental that I couldnt wait to get out of it was awful.
The ’07 Cobalt I owned for three years sucked. Just plain sucked, in a way that wasn’t apparent on the test drive. Not fun to drive at all and poorly engineered and constructed. I STILL prefer my ’10 Hyundai Accent GS 5 speed stick as better built and much, much more fun to drive even after the honeymoon has wore off.
Biggest tragedy in Spring Hill TN since JB Hood oversaw the Confederate suicide attack at the Carter Farm.
RIP Saturn 🙁
I have some relatives with an Astra – they seem to like it. However, Saturn didn’t seem to advertise it very much, so I assume many people didn’t even know about the Astra.
The L-Series and VUE were mediocre in terms of reliability, and the ION was just a lousy car in many ways.
Sad – the concept of Saturn was a good one on paper, but I guess it didn’t work out too well in real life.
In the 1990s, I had the chance to meet one of the UAW members who had been part of the team that negotiated the original Saturn agreement. He was a very smart, engaging person, and he pulled no punches when it came to describing either the company or the union. (I can’t recall his name, but he did write a book about his experiences.)
Even then, he said that both UAW leadership and GM management hated Saturn, and were looking for ways to undo not only the special UAW contract, but Saturn’s unique role within the company. He turned out to be correct…
I test drove a brand-new Ion in 2004, along with a Focus ZTW wagon and a Honda Civic EX sedan on the same day. The Ion was absolutely awful. It had NO redeeming qualities. The Civic had the best drivetrain, while the Focus had the best chassis tuning and steering. How a major corporation could release such a lackluster, half-finished product into a very competitive market segment would be a fascinating story all by itself.
“Even then, he said that both UAW leadership and GM management hated Saturn, and were looking for ways to undo not only the special UAW contract, but Saturn’s unique role within the company.”
Kinda reminds me of the statement attributed to Bob McNamara at the Edsel launch gala, “We have plans for phasing it out.”
I remember well when these came out back in 1992 but never owned one, nor knew anyone who bought one, except briefly when in Community College in 1993-1995 time frame.
He was a student and had a 4 door SL1 sedan in I think purple and what I recall was it needed new wipers badly. It wasn’t a half bad car the time or two I rode in the back (in and around Seattle).
It’s sad that GM had to muck up what was a good company to start out with. GM seems to be somewhat schizophrenic in that they tend to go overboard on a new idea, so much so that they can’t make any money off it and then find themselves overreaching to scale it back and ultimately it fails, this is a classic example of this IMO.
As to the Cobalt, I rented a refrigerator white 4 door in 2006 and though it wasn’t especially good, it wasn’t horrible either in many ways but I WAS pleasantly surprised that it was a updated as it was from a design stand point. The car had ditched the bench seat, column shifter for buckets and a floor console and an honest to goodness handbrake but that was largely it though.
It’s fit and finish outside was fine, but the interior finishes weren’t so robust though.
Jeff, you wrote a great article but there is no way you can tell me that any Saturn was ever “class leading.” The early cars were rough, noisy and expensive and not particularly well built or reliable. What sold them was a very clever marketing campaign mixed in with a fair amount of flag waving. My experience with Saturns was the people who loved them had never driven a Honda or Toyota and once the did, they never bought another one.
My mom had a 1997 SC1 and it was a total POS. Horrible car to drive and right after the warranty was up it started breaking. Serious stuff like water pumps and radiators. When I drove it for the last time after her death last year, it rattled, shook and squealed and it only had 72,000 km on it. Absolute junk!
My sister had a 2002 SL sedan and the thing was just plain horrible. Cheap, cheap, cheap except for the price tag which was not cheap. She had drunk the Saturn Cool-Aid and was in love with the thing. At 60,001 km the problems started and the car eventually self destructed at 125,000 km into a quivering pile of goop. Civics are not even at mid life at this mileage.
Sorry, patriots, nobody can convince this former garage man and GM employee than anything GM made past, say, 1985 (and in many cases long before) was not total crapola. There may have been a few exceptions but for my hard earned money, I’ll take a Japanese brand any day and not have to deal with the headaches.
I had a Honda and had driven several Hondas and Toyotas before buying my first Saturn. I’ve owned three Saturns, and still have two of them, the older of the two being 19 years old. While the S series was noisier than the Hondas and Toyotas of its time, I stand by the author’s assertion that the cars were, if not class-leading, competitive with the best.
Everyone’s entitled to his or her own opinion. Doesn’t make it right, though.
@”Everyone’s entitled to his or her own opinion.”
Thank you, thank you, Thank you!. You have made the day of this occasionally grumpy and curmudgeonly grammarian. I get so tired of reading and hearing that “everyone’s entitled to their opinion” that I can’t stand it anymore. I had almost given up. You, sir, have restored my faith that the human race is still (occasionally) capable of proper english. 🙂
We now return to our regularly scheduled programming.
Except it’s clunky, isn’t it. Imagine Henry James writing such a thing. In the old days we were taught to use only the masculine pronoun when implying both sexes. There was no confusion about the meaning.
I was an employee for Saturn for almost seven years in Long Island City, Queens, Ny.. It saddens me to see these comments. People tell me about their cars they love and still have until today. I personally think, the company should have not tried so hard to be likes others. The people wanted that bigger car. End of Story..
Now, I have owned a 1992 Honda Accord LX, with the 12-valve 2.2L SOHC and a 5 speed manual. I currently own a 1995 SC2, with automatic 4-speed. I am the type, that I perform my own maintenance when possible.
That being said, to compare the two cars: My Honda only ever required a clutch replacement, at 191,000(car was purchased with a failing clutch at 175,000 for $900). However, it had more rust than paint(this was 2005, when I owned it), and the brake system was completely unserviceable because the front brake rotors are pressed onto the hub assembly. Also, the engine has a timing belt, so this meant a costly $1,000 trip to the Honda dealership every 60,000 miles, as part of the regular maintenance schedule. Timing belts + Interference engines is usually a bad mix, and why Honda switched to timing chains in 2006-up models(Kinda like a Saturn engine……hmmm…..). My average fuel economy was anywhere between 26-28mpg with a K&N air filter, giving my about 450 miles on its 16-gallon tank. In terms of performance? Well, it was faster than a 2.2L OHV Cavalier, so I would say it ran about 17s in the 1/4-mile.
Now, let’s compare that to my current 1995 SC2. No rust. I average between 34-36mpg, with automatic might I add, the transmission valve body was serviceable in my driveway, with hand tools($235 from a rebuilder in New York vs the $783 for my clutch replacement), and only took 2 hours to replace. I was able to replace and bleed the brakes, once again, in my driveway with hand tools. I paid only $200 for my Saturn vs much more for a used Honda now. There is NO RUST, and did I mention NO RUST, not even on the sub frame or floor pans. In terms of engine design: I have a steel timing chain. No expense trips, every 60,000 miles, to a now-closed Saturn dealer to service the timing system. Performance? Well, the Twin Cams can run a STOCK high 15s 1/4-mile, and they can easily out corner a heavier Honda offering, with the stock suspension.
Both cars have their good points and their bad points. The Honda rarely needed service, but when it did, I always had to pay somebody at the Honda dealership or I had to buy parts from the dealership(and pay that lovely dealership “markup” for genuine Japanese parts). Sourcing parts from a salvage yard was often difficult, because you don’t find many reliable vehicles in salvage yards.
That being said, the Saturn poses more advantages, for myself, because I can work on it and repair it myself, instead of trusting somebody else and having to pay them tremendous labor rates. There are plenty of Saturns in salvage yards, especially 1995 models, because that was the best year for Saturn sales volume. I get better fuel economy, and better performance.
Oh, and my Saturn is currently at 170,000, with no chain slap or really any issues, other than the typical stuck oil control rings. So, yes, I do have to keep up on the oil level, but a simple teardown and rebuild with drain back holes drilled into the pistons actually poses a permanent solution to that problem.
I sold the Honda, to a person in need of a dependable automobile, for $250. I was in financial dire straits, at the time. So it worked for both of us. I regret selling it, because it was a very good car.
Take my testimonial for what it is worth, because if I still had my Honda, I would still drive the Saturn more each day.
We had a ’95 SL2 (5 speed), engine lasted for 267k miles, burning lots of oil in it’s later days. Timing chain finally broke and the car was junked. AC was still ice cold the day it died. Transmission and clutch held up fine. For a $1000 car with 100k miles on it when we got it, it was a great car. 40 MPG highway and good power for it’s era.
Driveway repairs were easy for the most part, starter replacement was a PIA, no room and you have to work by feel.
It was ‘totaled’ by insurance and got $1200 and keep the car, a few panels from you pull and she looked great again.
In my not so humble opinion, Saturn was never necessary. It was an interesting concept, but so flawed.
The last thing GM needed in the 80s and 90s was yet another division. They were having a hard enough time keeping the existing 7 divisions and NUMMI sorted.
The last thing GM should have advertised was that they created “a different kind of car company”. They were pretty much flat out admitting that all the other divisions were junk.
(I knew a few Saturn loyalists in the early days that truly believed Saturn was not a part of GM.. So maybe the marketing actually worked afterall.)
We had LS-1. Got a great deal when Saturn was not supposed to be dealing. I think it had been in inventory almost a year. Decent car really but it did have a few problems. Light control stalk would get so wot we could not touch it. Saturn told us this was “normal”! The car was stolen from right in front of our house in broad daylight.
My daughter bought an Astra and she is crazy about it. Incredible deal. They gave her all sorts of discounts and we had extra credit from a GM Master Card. I think she bought for under $10,000. Not bad for a new car which has given excellent service.
Great article about a great tragedy. Everyone except GM and the UAW was pretty psyched up about Saturn at the time. It got lots of good press and general goodwill, coming on the heels of a decade when it seemed Japan was owning the world.
If Saturn had been allowed to remain successful, they’d have folded Oldsmobile (historically the tech division) into it and the Volt would be a Saturn today.
Jeff, you said “Saturn was a “chimney” inside GM.” Good way to put it, since it ended up with nothing but ashes. The similar buzzword in high-tech these days is “silo”. Wikipedia has a good piece on the “silo effect” – check out the “beer distribution game”. It says a lot about what happened to GM in particular and American industry in general. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_silo#Silo_effect
What the great German physicist Max Planck said about science applies to GM and organizations in general, “A new (scientific) truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
>>If Saturn had been allowed to remain successful, they’d have folded Oldsmobile (historically the tech division) into it and the Volt would be a Saturn today.<<
Absolutely. The Volt as an Olds or Saturn makes a lot more sense than calling it a Chevy. Cadillac's not the place for it, either.
So many badges on so few cars GM didnt inflict the Saturn brand on the antipodes but the Vectra arrived with Holden badges as did the Astra. My sister bought a V6 03 Vectra $50k new some problems but a nice ride rearended and totalled for $9k in 08 and she was glad to be rid it had just needed a new watepump at 70kms. My brother in law sold the wreck to a panelbeater who repaired it as a loan car its still on the road but has cost $10k in maintenance good car no. The Solstice Sky looks to me like a rebadged Vauxhall VX220 and a fun car to drive originally a Lotus design.
If there was one car from Saturn that should have been saved it was the Sky. It’s sister car (Solstice) was just too feminine for my tastes.
This needs a re-edit with a TTAC filter, because there are plenty of errors, which seem almost, dare I say, biased?
They did make significant changes to the Vectra though to make it the L-series, it was still a lackluster car, it was kinda pretty in a generic way, the re-design in 2004(05?) made it a awful monster with a catfish grille. The L-had changes to make it semi-plastic, the front fenders and doors were plastic like the SL, only the rear quarters were sheetmetal.
The article states that the 2002 Vue is based of the the Equinox, Torrent and Antara, really, how, with a time machine? Since none of those cars were around in 2002? The Equinox did not debut until 2005, true that GM did take the Vue platform and convert into the Theta platform that underpinded the Equinox, Torrent and Et Al, BTW that line in your article is almost verbatim from Wikipedia, and Wikipedia as many teachers point out,is NOT A SOURCE. The first generation VUE did have all plastic panels and spaceframe design like the orignal SL, too bad that it came out too late after Saturn was starving for product, it hould have come out in 2000.
n the end though, Saturn was a very GM way of trying to solve a problem, here is a company with 5 car divisions at the time with a cluttred line up and what does it do? It comes up with a 6th, thats like a family that barely making ends meet deciding to have another baby, because that will make it better, and of course GM, being GM, especially in the 80’s, when there still was a “Delco Remy Turn Signal Division” an an “AC-Knob Division” it decided in wanted another one, with its own cute new logo, new dealerships, ahem, retailers rather, and its own car plant, with its own engine and transmission plant too!!.
One of the ideas that was thrown around in the late 80’s before Saturn was launched was to combine Saturn and Oldsmobile together, which could have worked, kinda, this was when Olds was already on the skids and looking for help.Which helps to explain why the early SL sedans look like little Cutlass sedans.
Saturn would have sold the small cars, so Olds could stop selling stuff like the Firenza and Calais, Oldsmobile would have focused on the mid size bread and butter Cutlass and Delta 88, Shillouette and Bravada(later Intrigue and the aborted Antares) and Aurora would have been like the divisions Lexus, replacing the 98 and Toronado(the Aurora was pretty much complete by 1990, but held back due to cash shortages)There was a very brief time that Oldsmobile did adopt one price strategy on some models(like Saturn) and 30 day no questions asked exchange program (like Saturn) and a 24hour customer assistance line(like Saturn), but stody old line Oldsmobile dealers balked at the changes and it was quietly canned.
>>There was a very brief time that Oldsmobile did adopt one price strategy on some models(like Saturn) and 30 day no questions asked exchange program (like Saturn) and a 24hour customer assistance line(like Saturn), but stody old line Oldsmobile dealers balked at the changes and it was quietly canned.<<
The story of pretty much any innovative, outside-the-box initiative at GM always seems to end with, "…and it was quietly canned."
Yes. Plus the original Volt might have been a roomy CUV instead of being a moni–Olds or something.
Saturn succeeded because it was ‘a different of car company, a different kind of car’. When it became just another GM division, it lost its reason for existing. Just imagine if BMW started making cutrate cars with front wheel drive and indifferent handling. Toyota was teetering on the brink with the whole recall issue because if a Toyota isn’t reliable, why else would people buy it? Hyundai is the one most in trouble in the future. Its name is synonymous with value, but with the increasing prosperity of Korea, wages won’t stay low forever, its currency won’t stay low forever, eventually it will have the same labor & currency cost as the Japanese.
Well, Hyundai is following the Japanese brands in producing cars in North America to answer issues with currency exchange rates and rising labor costs in Korea, so maybe they won’t be in “trouble” as you might say. For comparison, about 75-80% of the cars that Honda and Toyota sell in North America are manufactured in N.A. Hyundai isn’t there yet, but they do have a plant or two in Alabama or Georgia, I think.
That is why Hyundai have begun building stylish, high-quality cars. Now that they are well-established as a brand, they want to make cars that people desire, and not build the cheapest cars on the market. My i30 was not cheap. It cost Corolla money. I bought it because i wanted it. That is where Hyundai wants (and deserves) to be.
I Miss all the Brands that have been discontinued. Seven American Car Brands is Not Enough. Ten If you Include GMC, Jeep, And Ram. I miss the day when there Were easily 15 counting Hummer, Saturn, Plymouth, Olds, Pontiac,Mercury,Eagle, AMC,thats 18+ American car Brands Whittled down to 10, only 7 of which sell cars AT the moment.
I hardly miss my Automotive News subscription, with much Thanks for coverage on TTAC as well as Curbside Classics. But There just were no longer the Model Variations & Introductions that there once almost weekly.
Id like clear model specific taillights,fascia,trim on the few models they do sell, perhaps with lesser models, as well as a hierarchy Top of The Line… Like Camaro, RS & Z28, Impala could have a BelAir Model or a Biscayne stripper with rollup windows on the Malibu…No that should be The Chevelle300
No What Do we do to differentiate Cruze models?
Never Nova Again. Ditto, Cavalier, Vega, Citation, Cobalt,Monza,Chevy 2, 3? Chevy 3?no no… Corvair forget it… Concours too Cadillac reminiscent.
Lets See… Sorry I kind of forgot that Saturn is the Topic here.
It always left me kind of cold Saturn did. I first became aware of it at The LA County Fair When they introduced GREEN BLACK as a Color… It Looked Ivy in Light, Black at Night, always with a black tint
… But other then that I wondered how differeent from a Cavalier could it be?
I personally like my 2002 SL1. It has soft touch materials in it. I’m 20 and maybe the Ion and SL’s were made for parents to buy their sons and daughters because I know a lot of people on Youtube that love their Saturns. I think Saturn should have advertised more to the college students in the early 2000’s. My SL isn’t loud it’s just fine they can keep their Civics. My Satty was born in Tennessee.
The L Series looked like a Ford Contour clone, which it was since the Opel Vectra competes with Ford Mondeo.
But, just as the Contour was being phased out for being a ‘too small intermediate car’. the LS was appearing. Why didn’t GM just make the 1999 Olds Alero a Saturn instead?
But, Saturn fans can still get the last Vue as a Chevy Captiva Sport! They just have to wait til the rental companies dump them on the usec car market.
The original S-series Saturns were designed from scratch. I have a 1997 SW2 wagon and I still marvel at it. I have owned 3 Saturns previously (1992 SL2 – 1994 SL1 – 2003 Ion 3) and found that all were impressive in their uniqueness, simplicity, power and driveability. The S-series cars made the company and built its fan base. GM did ruin the jewel that was Saturn. Maybe the S-cars were built too well and lasted too long? There are many on the road with over 300,000 miles on them. If I were to wave my magic wand and revive Saturn, I would go back to building only the S-Series cars.
I never got why Saturn just didn’t keep the S series and why they renamed the car the Ion. that’s the thing I never got with GM. We’re gonna build a brand equity for one or two generations, and then completely abandon that for some odd reason it has never made any sense to me. Corolla been a Toyota nameplate since 1968. Civic since 1972 on. Sentra since 1982. Having a trusted name that you know really means something to people I think. I mean I know there’s plenty of people out there who aren’t fans of imports, but most buyers can think Camry and know what that means or think about Accord, and know what that means. Nameplate equity and recognition definitely has value in the automotive world. I never got why General Motors can’t seem to figure that out on their cars. They seem to do it just fine with trucks and SUVs! Silverado, Suburban and Blazer have been around forever! Obviously those names have some cachet with the buying public.
I was a Parts and Collision manager with Saturn from 1991-1998. Saturns concept, it’s philosophy and ideals were great…… build an affordable car for the general public, here in the USA and stand behind it. It had a great deal with the union and training was the best. Then, good old GM, stopped giving them development money, the body style got old, GM had to gab money from Saturn because they could not keep up with the imports and it all went to hell! Tell me big oil had nothing to do with the demise of the Saturn EV1, electric car and I know you believe in the tooth fairy. Too bad it had to end like that. This was a great idea that got swallowed up by corporate greed & meddling . I do have some interesting Saturn memorabilia if anyone is interested….thekustom@yahoo.com
I have a relative who owns a Saturn Ion. The only reason he bought it is because yet another relative had bought a Saturn (a Vue) the year before. This guy previously had bought a Subaru, only because that same “other relative” had bought a Subaru the year before.
Anyway, the Saturn Ion is awful. How awful? When this guy’s Ion was about a year old, I drove up to visit him in a Chevrolet Cobalt rented from Hertz. Even the El Cheapo Rental Car Special Cobalt was a better, more pleasant car, and that was not just because the speedometer was in front of the driver instead of on top of the middle of the dash, where any sane designer would have put only the clock. Saturn’s designers must have put the speedometer there just to prove they could still do something different. Pathetic.
I never liked saturn. Hideous cars. The back of the SL was just awful. Almost looked like the body was on backwards. Let’s see the 1.9 engines liked to drink oil. The cars interior was cramped and plascticy. I’m still amassed that they sold a one since the body was plastic and gm was known for disintegrating plastic body parts. I fully expected these cars to crumble like the fender extensions on a Cadillac. Ugly as they are they don’t seem so bad now since they were perfect in comparison to the horrible vue with its terrible v6 and CVT transmissions and the Opel cars. Also the logo reminded me of the commercial they had for flea collars with the tick moving through the dog hair. Good riddance to a devision that was never needed. The should have just improved the horrible little cavalier and fixed the flawed 3 .1 v6s. Made a decent Cadillac or something. Why have so many small cars anyway??
Saturns S-cars were and still are very contemporary, good looking cars. If GM lost money on the Saturn brand it was because of bad business decisions and certainly not due to any lack in quality or popularity of the car itself. The plastic body platform makes these cars look ‘still new’ on the road today. I smiled driving in my 1997 SW2 this morning as I spotted a nice round 2 inch rust out hole in the lower front fender of a much newer VW Jetta. Thank the Auto Unions and GM’s fecklessness for the demise of Saturn and not the engineers, designers and assembly workers who put their hearts and talents into these unique little cars. If you have $1,500 dollars in your pocket go out and buy a 16 year old Saturn S-series car and drive it problem free for 2 years and counting like I did.
I agree with Dan.
Don’t confuse the later “fake” Saturns, the typical GM badge engineered crap, aka the SINO’s (Saturns In Name Only), with the real Saturns, which were the S-Series. I’ve owned three S-Series so far – a ’97 SL2 bought new (owned from ’97-’00), a ’95 SL2 bought eight years ago and still going strong at 185k miles after being passed down to my HS/college son a year ago, and an ’02 SL2 that is my grocery getter and winter/rainy day driver at 113k miles, and which allows me to keep the pleasure use only vehicles in the garage.
My experience with them has been so good, and since I have another son who starts driving this year, I’m currently in the market for a fourth S-Series. They make great little efficient, easy to work on and cheap to insure and fix daily drivers. With the space frame and polymer panels, they are forgiving of boo-boos by new drivers, and fenders and door panels can be replaced in just a few minutes in the driveway with just hand tools and easy to find, still pristine, inexpensive, same-color replacement panels from a “U-Pull-It” yard donor car. Unlike typical unibody vehicles, the space frame is like a full cage, so they’re also highly rated from a collision safety standpoint.
It’s a testament to how rugged and reliable the S-Series cars were (and are) by how many are still on the roads today, even though they are all between 14 and 23 years old, many with over 200k miles, with 300k + not unusual, and at least one on the Saturn forums with almost 900k. There are still tons of them available for sale, and parts are still plentiful. They were designed to be modular and therefore easy to upgrade and repair. Just a little routine maintenance generally keeps them happy, and the few known problems are comparatively easy to address for someone with access to the internet, a few hand tools, and some basic DIY skills. The ones that die typically were murdered by abuse, neglect, and/or ignorance.
In many ways they remind me of a latter day Model T.
Does anyone still have that upside down Ion? I’d like to grab a few chassis parts and maybe a plastic panel.
Typical GM story. They always were able to grab defeat from the jaws of victory.
Last August I got a 2003 Saturn L200 with 180,000 miles on it and have put 7000 miles on it. I’ve had to put a little work into it, but not too bad. Overall I like it.
In addition to Carmine’s reference to the Vue: The ION shared nothing with the Cobalt as it came out two years before the Cobalt. When the Cobalt came out the ION shared some 800 “improvements” that were introduced with the Cobalt.
The ION introduced the Delta platform in NA, which the Cobalt and G5 and HHR used in the same way the Equinox used the Vue platform.
I have owned an 05 ION from mile 23. Weird for weirdness sake as GM had no clue about the buyers of Saturn product. Many IONs are racking up mileage of the sort the S Series has.
And I consider my ION a “true” Saturn, built in Spring Hill under the original UAW contract, space frame and polymer panels.
It also rides better, is quieter, has a smaller turning radius, is easier to enter and exit and doesn’t suck oil like the 95 SL1 I had.
It has also been reliable [minus the ignition switch debacle]: only oil changes, tires and gasoline in 63,000 miles.
BTW: the center instrument pod works as intended. No looking down to check speed and gauges, they’re always there at eye level. Dorky but effective.
Going to check out a Vue Redline Monday. I miss Saturn. I miiss the customer service and uniqueness.
A few of the comments here start with “Saturn succeeded”. If it never made money, it didn’t succeed. Even slightly.
Carmine was probably at his ornery best here with his summary of the inherent wrongness of Saturn.
GM, specifically Chevrolet, was at one time the 8th Wonder of the World. Imagine if the money sunk into building Saturn from the ground up had been put into giving Chevy a few cars that would have made Toyota tremble.
Saturn was a huge hit, here in the rust belt area of Ohio. I see probably a good 30% of vehicles on the road, sporting a Saturn badge.
While their investment was far too great, for the returns to ever offset them, I will say that in certain regions of the country, Saturn DID actually revitalize consumer faith in GM.
However, Saturn did not win enough “Battles”, to ultimately win the “War”.
There are many, many reasons why Saturn failed, and the biggest one being their rebadged models. Just like Pontiac, Buick, Oldsmobile. All of this started, in the early 1980s.
Cadillac still has some autonomy, but is currently ranked “Worst” in reliability, per consumer reports. So, I don’t see them succeeding much longer. Buick is currently the best ranked brand, that GM has. Why buy a junk heap Caddy, when you can get luxury comfort, for cheaper price, out of a Buick?
Chevy had the Prizm which was the Corolla’s equal. That car would have made a better Saturn had it been badged and marketed the same way and would have had 3 updates during it’s time period. Costs would have been a fraction of what GM spent. Would have saved a lot of money not developing a new design and plant unless Fremont could not have kept up with demand, had this approach sold as well as the S cars.
Maybe this approach wouldn’t have worked, people may have wanted made and designed in USA, but would this fact really have mattered to most folks, as long as they were getting a well built and dependable car along with the “unique Saturn dealership experience”?
Some sort of quasi-Saturn/NUMMI scheme would have worked. The problem was GM didn’t understand the reason NUMMI cars weren’t selling is the simple fact they were being sold at Chevy dealers, first as Chevy Novas, then as Geo Prisms. One of the better anecdotes of the NUMMI Novas is what a great deal they were since most people didn’t know there were Toyota Corollas and Chevy dealers had to discount them to sell.
GM didn’t seem to grasp that if the NUMMI cars had been spun-off into their own, stand-alone dealerships, they’d have had a winner, and the Saturn Spring Hill plant could have been a second NUMMI plant. But GM management just didn’t get it. Worse, they had access to lots of money. This seems to be a great example of having too much money to make the right decisions. If there hadn’t been so much, a much more cost-effective NUMMI plan might actually have come to fruition.
OTOH, imagine what a GM car that was every bit as good as a Toyota (because it ‘was’ a Toyota) might have done to Toyota sales in the US. I get the feeling that Toyota knew, all too well, the implications of such a scenario and would have been more than a little adverse to expanding the NUMMI program.
There is a correction you need to make, in this article. It is concerning the L-Series/Ion Scrap-O-Tech boat anchors. Those were NOT good engines. Final production years of the 2.4L had issues with stuck oil control rings, resulting in a recall. 2.2L Scrap-O-Techs are notorious for timing chain failures, ESPECIALLY the L-series/J-Body years of early 2000s, due to the restrictive design for the chain tensioner. It causes low oil flow during periods of low-rpm idling, which causes the chinsy, china-man steel chain the snap like a toothpick.
Turbocharged/Supercharged 2.0L Scrap-O-Techs are prone to cracked engine blocks and intake valve oil contamination, at about 40,000 miles, due to the direct injection system they use(who would have thought, that using a solvent such as gasoline on intake valves would keep them clean…..???)
Not to be confused with the new “Eco-Tec” engine family that is being used in the Cruze. Old Scrap-O-Techs are also designed by Opel, and are only good for aluminum recycling, unless you have a fishing boat. Then they make a fairly rugged anchor.
The Ecotec was designed by GM Powertrain NA, Saab, Opel and Lotus as a collaboration for worldwide use. It’s not “an Opel design”, though it had their input.
Many of these later Ecotec engines in the ION and other applications across GM post 03 are going 2-300,000 miles and more with little upkeep and without chronic oil sucking.
The 1.9 was known for timing chain tensioner problems, cracked heads and it’s oil consumption was never addressed. It was hardly a jewel itself.
From Wickipedia. See GM Powertrain as well
“The ‘Ecotec’ name was adopted in 2000 for the new generation of Family II engines. The name was already used for the Opel GM Family II engine, Family 1 and Family 0 ranges. GM intends this new Ecotec to become its global 4-cylinder, and it has already fully replaced their OHV I4 line.
The Ecotec engine is a DOHC 4-valve design with an forged steel block and head (L850 for 86 mm bore applications, and L880 for 88 mm bore[citation needed]), designed for displacements from 1.8 to 2.4 L. Development began in 1994, by an international team of engineers and technicians from Opel’s International Technical Development Center in Rüsselsheim, Germany, GM Powertrain in Pontiac, Michigan, and Saab in Södertälje, Sweden.[2] Much of the development work on this project was carried out by Lotus Engineering, Hethel, United Kingdom. The engine uses aluminum pistons and cast iron cylinder liners. Vibration is reduced with twin balance shafts.
The first engine in the Ecotec Gen I line-up was Ecotec 2.2 L61, introduced in 2000.
The current Ecotec line is manufactured in Tonawanda, New York,.[2]”
SOHC from 1991-1998 was prone to cracked heads. In 1999, GM changed the casting and corrected the problem.
DOHC 1.9L did not have the problems with cracked heads.
Timing chain tensioner issues were only present on neglected 1.9L engines, that the owner failed to keep the oil level at or slightly above the “FULL” line.
Yes, they did have a problem with stuck oil control rings. I never said the 1.9L engine was a gem. I merely stated facts about the Scrap-O-Tech and why it is a boat anchor piece of junk. It was quite the money maker, for my family, at our salvage yard. Those snapped timing chains made us an easy $550-$750 a piece, for a used engine sale to a shop, to some unsuspecting victim that wanted to keep their J-Body running.
And I know of at least one Saturn 1.9L, that the original owner drove for 883,000+ miles, while merely following the factory maintenance schedule, as prescribed by GM.
There is a Saturn SL1, driving around St. Louis, MO, right now. The original owner has over 624,000 miles on it.
When ia the last time you recall a Scrap-O-Tech doing that? I sure can’t, either…..
I’m in the EU (Austria) and let me tell you those were the bad old years at Opel so I do not doubt anything you say about these engines – you hardly see any Opels built during that period on the road still; not so with VWs or even Peugeots and Renaults (!). The current Opels are good (as I understand are the related Buicks in the US), and I believe the last Korean Chevrolets sold in the EU were also OK.
The Saturn 1.9L was a standalone engine design, built from the ground up by GM. Plenty of old Saturns are still on the road, burning oil, but still running.
The Opel Eco-Tech, that replaced it was the junk heap, with known issues of timing chain failures and leaky water pumps(which was a design borrowed from the Quad 4 Oldsmobile boat anchors).
Thank you for at least clarifying, that there is some validity to what I am saying.
I would blame japanese car makers for that.in 70s USA government should have put heavy tarriff on japanese cars to make them alot more expensive than domestic cars.
They did. There were “voluntary” import quotas. That both limited volume and significantly raised the price of Japanese cars. That’s when they started building plants in the US. There’s no free lunch.
Saturn definitely never made a lot of sense, despite some very early highlights when the brand first came to be.
That said, I recently let go of our 2005 Saturn Vue, 2.2L four, 5 speed, FWD that was a vehicle I owned for 7 years, by far the longest duration out of any of the vehicles I have owned. It was totally reliable, extremely fuel efficient, never asked for anything other than routine maintenance, two sets of front brakes and two sets of tires. It still had plenty of life left it in, we simply outgrew it as a family of 4.
The hyperbole is strong in this article.
Are you clear on the definition of the word? “Exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.”
You think there’s statements or claims in this article not meant to be taken literally? Examples, please?
I think it’s rather toned down, actually, given the colossal $12 billion dollar blunder GM made with Saturn. And that’s fact, not hyperbole.
I found the way the author used badge engineering to be hyperbolic. My interpretation appears to be incorrect, since evidently it was meant to be taken literally.
I always thought the Saturn Ion was downright ugly–I recall reading the road test in Car & Driver; one of the reviewers wrote: “We waited seven years for this?” In “car Guys vs. Bean Counters” Bob Lutz wrote that the Ion was designed to appeal to Millenials who didn’t like cars. That begs the question-if the millenials didn’t like cars, then why design one for them?
I never liked the Saturns. Ugly, plastic cars with cheap interiors and seats set very low – even in my late 20s before I had back problems I didn’t want to fall into one of these things. Several friends had late ’90s Saturns and said while they were ok for what they were, they were very problematic. Another friend had an ’05 Cobalt 2dr with a stick and cursed that thing everyday until he got rid of it and actually traded down 3 years to get a Focus hatch.
Saturn was nothing more than a giant, worthless boondoggle, a huge waste of time and money. Imagine what GM could have done with those billions to improve the small and mid-size cars they were already building. Just boggles the mind.
There is a 22-year old “Worthless Boondoogle” 2-dr, twin cam, sitting in my driveway with NO RUST, working power sunroof, working headlamp motors, runs, and even shifts so smooth you can’t even feel the gear changes, with 170,000+ miles that would say otherwise…..
You apparently can’t tell the difference between applying those two words to a $12 billion bad business decision and to a car still running in your driveway.
Did anyone ever say that the Saturn cars were actually bad cars? No. Just a bad business idea. There’s a big difference between the two, but one that car owners seem to never be able to discern.
GM’s $12 billion loss is your gain. Clear enough?
Thank you Paul. Yes, the money GM spent on Saturn vs. what they achieved in the end made this venture a giant boondoggle. Even GM realized this in the end otherwise they would have never cancelled the brand.
Car owners are always going to see things differently than the bean counters on the 14th floor.
I never disputed the decisions made cost GM way to much money, however Paul, as a salvage yard owner and having a GM plant mere 15 minutes from my house, I can say that while business executives will cite Saturn as a failure because of P/E ratios and P&L statements, the effect Saturn had on GM’s reputation actually helped GM become the world’s leading automaker, in the 1990s.
Since we like to deal in FACTS, here is a fact that can’t be disputed(two actually):
1. In 1992, Saturn was ranked 3rd in overall customer satisfaction, by J.D. Power & Associates, only trailing Lexus and Infinity(which are both high-end luxury models made by Toyota and Nissan)
70% of ALL new Saturn sales, in 1991-1992, were from import owners trading in a Honda/Toyota compact to buy a new Saturn.
Saturn was never meant to last, and the UAW made sure of that. The UAW and GM corporate certainly do not care about customers being taken care of. They both care about making maximum profits for the least amount of expense involved. And we all know that labor unions HATE employees that get to work directly with management, as opposed to working against management. This would also explain why Saturn employess jad an average 2.5% absentee rate, as opposed to the average 14% at other GM facilities(must be nice to have union protection so you can call off at least once out of every 7 work days and not get fired for it)
Saturn had a 17% profit margin factored into the “No-Haggle” price scheme, so the cars were certainly profitable(as other divisions and models were only averaging about 12% at that time).
Saturn certainly wasn’t a failure, because it restored customer base in regional areas where GM was not popular anymore, such as my area of Ohio.
And there are no references to confirm a $12 billion dollar total loss, as GM never disclosed the full details of Saturn’s finances publicly. Estimated sales revenue over the 25 year is $3.9 billion. So, we are talking $16 billion in total outlays? For someone to state that is a fact, there needs to be a credible source. Estimates are not facts, hence why they are called estimates.
There is an inherent fallacy with your thinking. Companies generally don’t make decisions on the basis of sunk costs- and if they do, their executive teams need to be round filed. Even if the money put into the project was not going to be recoverable in the short term, or even for a really long time, the question of continued investment is answered based on its potential for return on that specific investment. GM decided to kill Saturn, right or wrong, because they saw no profit from investment in its future.
They had a point, insomuch that GM needed to figure out how to build and sell competitive and customer satisfying products across its entire lineup. GM needs to sell customer satisfying Buicks and Cadillacs and Chevys. They need to do that irrespective of whether or not they make or do not make customer satisfying Saturns. The problem with both the Saturn and NUMMI was that they were encapsulated experiments on whether they could or could not produce competitive products.
GM didn’t need to create an experiment to do that. GM needed to do that, or wind up their business. If GM or any company is terminally incapable of producing competitive products, it’s time to give up. Wasting time with Saturn was really just a way to avoid firing hide bound morons long overdue for firing.
A few years ago when I needed another car, I started searching. I wanted something small and economical for my long commute.
I found a ’94 Saturn SL2 on Craigslist with only 71,000 miles on it, asking price $1800. When I went to test drive the car, the owner had a clean Carfax for it. I talked him down to $1600. I was pleased. At first.
Mine was the same color as the station wagon at the top of the article, only duller. The interior was a light tan. I really didn’t care for the combination, but hey, I wasn’t buying if for looks.
Being a ’94, the car had the #$%^ing automatic front seat belts. Which were stuck in the wrong direction, except when they weren’t. I will NEVER forget the day when the belts moved on their own to the RIGHT position, and I pulled the fuse so they’d stay that way!
Speaking of automatics, this car had one. Again, not my first choice. It wouldn’t get out of its own way.
I bought a new pair of front tires because the control arms needed replaced and I didn’t know it. Not the car’s fault.
Then there was oil consumption. My commute at the time was about 60 miles each day, round trip. By the end of the time I owned it, I was throwing a quart of oil in it about every week and a half.
I WILL say it was reliable. It never let me down. But I really never liked the way it rode. And drove. And the horrendous oil consumption. Plus the headliner started coming down!
I ended up donating it to Volunteers of America for the tax write-off. I’ve seldom been so glad to get rid of a car.
Despite the Saturn love out there, I have no desire to own another one.
What do you expect for $1600? And how old was it? So many think low miles is “be all end all”, but never factor age.
It’s one thing to pay $16,000+ and complain, but a beater? Just saying.
That’s the point. It WASN’T a beater, at least to all outward appearances. I had no reason to think it was one. Or would become one.
I bought it in 2012, I think. So it was 18 years old. But so what? At only 71,000 original miles, it should have had a lot of life left in it.
So yeah, it left a sour taste in my mouth toward the brand.
“So it was 18 years old. But so what? At only 71,000 original miles, it should have had a lot of life left in it.”
MYTH: “Cars that sit for long time with low miles are preserved”
FACT: Cars age with time, period. There are stories of buyers who got low mile older cars assuming “they’re still new”. 18 years is far from “new”. #1, rubber seals dry out and who knows what else has degraded. Thus, the oil leaks. And the “stuck” seat belts.
Seasoned car collectors/mechanics know that any car that sat for long time needs attention and can’t be ‘ready to go on a trip’ just because the odometer is low.
One internet post was a kid with a 20-30 year old Plymouth Gran Fury, with low miles, who tried to use as daily commuter. Well, lots of tow truck calls and missed days of work later, got rid of it.
Not every potential suitor was a tire-kicking lookie-loo. Roger Penske had inked a firm deal with Samsung Motors of Korea to continue the brand under his stewardship.
It was nixed at the last minute by Carlos Ghosen, who didn’t want Nissan NA to competition from Nissan’s own designs.
The Spring Hill plant is still running. So there is some investment still working. Good thing it wasn’t closed and torn down, that would be a huge embarrassment, I think.
A counter point is the former DSM/Mistsubishi plant in Normal IL, built a few years prior to Spring Hill, is now closed. Who would have thought that a “quality Japanese company”* would have a dead plant, versus GM?
*What everyone who doesn’t know cars assumes, that any Asian make has to be “high quality”.
PS: Would like to see a “Mitsubishi’s Deadly Sins” series, just to show that GM doesn’t have a ‘monopoly’ on bad car business decisions.
There are a LOT of GM bashers, on this site. It is quite ironic, and I hope you were being sarcastic with the “good, quality car company”, as Shitsubishi is owned by Chrylser, to which any mechanic KNOWS that the word “Chrysler” and the phrase “good, quality car” are found in the same sentence about as often as you see Chrysler at the top ranked position for Consumer Reports on “Most Reliable Vehicles”(when in fact, they are typically ranked DEAD LAST, in all marques)
I can name a few Mitsubishi Deadly Sins:
The Eclipse Turbo 2.0L(They ran superb, IF you could keep them running and the head gasket solid)
The Lancer EVO package Turbo(All 276hp reduced to ZERO hp, WHEN the engine block cracked like an iPhone screen hitting concrete……)
Then there was that cursed 3.0L SOHC K-car engine, which would make a Saturn 1.9L look like a “green” alternative, after the valve guides dropped into the cylinders. You could measure your oil consumption in quarts to the mile……)
Let’s see, what else? Oh, the NA 3.0L Dodge Stealth/3000GT engines, which would fry the timing belt almost immediately after the warranty expired.(Also used in the Eclipse, after the 2000 model year gen change)
And if I am not mistaken, doesn’t Chrysler have a recall on the current Mitsubishi 2.4L engine, for back crankshaft main bearings, on various models?
I haven’t looked it up, recently, but I am pretty sure that 2.4L DOHC is a Mitsubishi engine. I know a few of my friends have that engine, and I have teased them relentlessly about their up-and-coming engine failure to be…….
D.A.R.E.
Dodge Addiction Rehabilitation Education
Because friends, don’t let friends drive a Dodge…..
The awful sexual harassment cases and toxic company culture at Diamond Star Motors also didn’t help, either.
If you were committed to the idea that buying a domestic marque is imperative, the establishment of the Saturn brand gave you relief that was euphoric. How else could you explain the enthusiasm for cars that were inferior to the previous generation of Civics and Carolla when they were introduced. I had a 1993 SL1, and felt the lack of modern refinement was a fair trade off for the outstanding dealer experience and my sense that I was expressing myself in a referendum on the direction of the US auto industry.
GM made a bold statement back then by crushing a large number of Saturns that were the subject of a recall. Now they sit actionless on faulty ignition switches until investigators and Lawyers force them into action. While I can say that GM cars are the best they have ever been, I will wait to see if this is just a post Government rescue aberration. I imagine cheap gasoline has been enough to resurrect the GM thinking of old.
Yes, Saturn had many problems in its second decade including the re-badging of various vehicles as Saturns. However, I cannot believe that I’m so alone in my experience with an L Series car powered by an ECOTEC 2.2L with a four speed A/T. The Ododmeter reading is approaching 266,000 miles as of this date with no engine problems and a only short lived transmission downshifting issue (over a decade ago) which never required repair work. In short, I serviced the car when required and took care of other maintenance when needed. The car drives no differently than when I’d purchased used in 2001 with 24,225 miles on it (a former Enterprise rental car) which is to say that it drives very well.
Quite apart from the recalls – relatively minor – which occurred and which were taken care of on my car, I have a hunch that some of the issues which came up with L Series vehicles related to poor maintenance practices by their owners. Generally, people I know who’ve owned these cars have taken car of them and they’re continuing to run well because of it.
You have been more lucky, than anything. It is well-documented, how the timing chain tensioner hole for oil flow is drilled too small, which causes the restriction in oil flow.
Aftermarket timing chain replacement kits come with a tensioner that has a larger diameter hole for the oil flow, to eliminate the problem.
It is no different than the issues with GM TCC solenoids on the old THM-125 3-speed transmission. Just because the TCC in my Grand Am hasn’t gone bad, doesn’t mean the design isn’t flawed. It just means I have been lucky, so far. Those solenoids have the same problem with restricted oil flow, and they will overheat, resulting in the solenoid sticking.
I bought my 1994 SW2 5-speed in 1998 (with 41,000 miles) to replace an awful 1990 Mitsubishi Eclipse (bought for the looks; paid dearly over the years). The Saturn was same model as the picture, except that mine had dark tinted windows that looked great against its light gold body color. The SW2 was a pleasure to drive for over 10 years and 140,000 additional miles through all kinds of weather conditions, and is what I consider to be the signature model from Saturn. It was class superior in all areas and had a great support network. I gave the car to one of my sons in 2008 and he proceeded to drive it for another 25,000 miles before selling it (!) to buy a new Subaru (America’s current sensible car!). I drive Subaru and Corvette today but consider the SW2 to be the best car owning experience I’ve ever had.
Old Saturns don’t die. People KILL them. So, make sure you always check your oil. Sad to hear you had to learn the “hard way” about buying a Chrysler product, though.
My first Saturn was a 2002 SL1 that was a true one owner car with 250,000 miles on it when purchased. Car used a quart of oil about every 700-1000 miles depending on how hard you got on it. I drove that car to just over 328,000 when I traded it in. They only gave me $250 for it but hey, that’s what I paid for it. I now have another 2002 but this one is an SL2. A/C works, does the same with oil as the other one and I only paid $500 for this one. It now has 170,000 on it and I know it will easily get to the 300k mark and cost me pennies getting there. Parts are cheap either on Ebay or in the junkyard so why would I ever get rid of it. Lastly, go with the manual, I’d never own an automatic one of these.
Now, in 2023, Saturn SL’s are near extinct in Northern states. Ions died off quicker.
Cheap cars are now $1800, and up, and working class now get Toyota or Honda compacts*. Maybe other Asian makes, but ‘beater’ domestic compacts are few and far between. Early 2010’s Chevy Cruze, Fiat Dart, and DCT Focus just are not long term cars.
*Not counting work trucks or vans.
I currently own 2 Saturns, and would not trade them for anything else.
1.) 1995 SC2 (Slightly Modified..LOL)**** Engine:
-3.6L GM high feature engine (RPO code: LY7)
-JE pistons with 9.2:1 compression, made out of the FSR forging.
-Spool H-Beam rods
-750cc injectors running at 58psi (flow like 850’s on 43psi)
-Megasquirt3X controls the fuel, VVT, ignition, tach, fans, and has a Flex Fuel sensor.
– Twin walbro 255l/hr pumps regulated by a Treadstone Performance relator
-HP6262 turbo
-Treadstone intercooler core with custom end tanks
– Turbosmart 38mm wastegate
-Turbosmart 50mm Blow off valve
-3in custom exhaust with a magnaflow chambered muffler and a hidden custom packed muffler.
**** Suspension:
AMR coilovers with pillow mounts on the front (can’t remember the spring rate…650 lb/in maybe?)
QA1 double adjustable shocks on the rear with 130 lb/in spring rate
*** Interior:
-Busted-ass 93 coupe black leather bucket front seats
-Full set of Autometer gauges: speedo, tach, fuel level, temp, two EGT gauges, boost/vac and oil pressure.
-Innovate wideband gauge
-Customer indicators; turn signal, over temp, Check engine light, battery voltage low
– Hurst t-shift handle with accessory button (nitrous button).
– 5lb Nitrous express bottle mounted on the driveshaft tunnel just behind the front seats so its easy to reach (just in case).
*** Exterior:
-Clear corner front turn signal housings (with amber turn signals so the colors are legal)
– Full set of special addition black badges
-Turbo emblem from a Saturn Sky on the rear
-Fadded-ass clear coat all over the top.
*** Additional info:
-Shortened Ford 8.8in rear end with customer 31-spline moser axles.
-Tru-trac differential with a 3.08 rear end gear
-Driveshaft shop custom drive shaft
-Aisin AY6 6-speed manual transmission
-Line lock on front brakes for the burn out box (or just burns where ever)
-GReddy Profec-b Spec2 with remote lo/hi boost switch on steering wheel.
Honda Cant touch it!!
And My Baby is a 1994 Homecoming Edition, one owner all original.. 117,000 miles
That 1995 SC2 sounds like a LOT of fun.
Check THIS one out:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XqYEegKYfZE
A few of the writers are very biased against GM, on this site, and when they write about Saturn it shows.
I believe that GM made a huge mistake from the start they already had small fuel efficient cars refined small cars sold in Europe, the rebadge from the Opel car lines from the start, sold at Saturn dealerships would have been a success .The Opel Division unmolested by the corporate cheap squad at general motors. The cheap squad needs a job right? They could have easily supplied a trendy fuel efficient line of mid and small cars that were refined inside and out. The cost of sharing the same tooling, increased savings from quantity of manufactured shared parts and engineering costs would have benefited the global picture. The1995 facelift of Saturn cars featured many parts and styling from decade old Opel vehicles. Instead GM waited until it was to late and put the GM cheap squad to work on the Saturn Aura which earned the title the North American car of the year in 2008, Generated more excitment than the Buck Regal reincarnation, repeated thru the rest of the Opel line up would have generated excitement for years after. Instead after the crash they made the same mistake again trying to revive Grandpas Buick Brand in America? The decision to keep the Buick brand was made at the corporate level because of Great Buick sales in China. That is fine in China the car sold only resembles the North American version power plants and other parts are modified and made in China for the Chinese market. The revival of the Saturn brand of rebadged Opel’s with the latest power plants, transmissions, and refined interiors would have indeed been revolutionary idea, much easier than selling Grandpa’s Buicks with the waterfall grills and the portholes. The Buick brand should have been axed in north America. The upscale minivan slot could have been filled in North America by the GMC reincarnations, Just another example of an American now global corporation not learning from it’s mistakes. Of course the fact remains the choice I am proposing would have probably further damaged the Chevrolet Brand but they could have sold down scale versions with cheap squad interiors to people who just shop cheap and are willing to drive it as long as it starts and moves.
Its goes deeper than just a mistake of a car. GM wanted a car that was different and competitive. They should have just stuck to basics and improve upon them. Also GM wasnt tightening their belt enough downsizing and managing better. Overpayed UAW workers and salaried employees was unsustainable. Another failure that goes on til this day at all GM plants is waste and inefficiency. They dont practice what they preach like the Japs and Koreans do who are continually improving as companies and employees working together and dont need to come up with gimmicks and cheap tricks. The bottom line is people. Devoted and loyal people. The ants have overcome the elephant. Question now is how long can domestic brands keep their head above water as the Asians excel and rise to another occasion. They simply rule the Earth, culturally, economically and now militarily as they advance to unite all of the Eastern Hemisphere with great projects as the Silk Road. They are the new World leader.
“… Roger Penske had inked a firm deal with (Renault) Samsung Motors of Korea to continue the brand under his stewardship. It was nixed at the last minute by Carlos Ghosn [fixed], who didn’t want (competition) …”
Deal wasn’t “firm” and not etched in stone. Planned to close on deal to buy Saturn brand from GM on Sept 30th, 2009. But, Nissan objected to Renault-Samsung providing product and cancelled agreement. “We will be competing with ourselves” said someone. Penske couldn’t find another supplier, since GM was only going build Aura, Astra, and Vue for 2 more years. So, no deal.
Local Saturn dealer went all out with autumn decorations and balloons, ready for deal to close. But, shut down on Oct 1st, and sent cars to another Saturn place for sell-off.. The balloons were slowly deflating into the winter. Dealer building was re-modeled to an office building, but now empty, with still large parking lots.
you see this management ploy a lot.
The organization has stagnated and/or has too many conflicting demands on it, suffers from bloat, infighting, resistance to change, and lack of focus.
Rather than fix that, stand up another organization and hope that the latter succeeds and takes over/replaces the former.
What tends to happen is the former organization concentrates on trying to destroy the latter organization, which of course has to spend a lot of (mental) energy defending itself.
In either case, a LOT of resources will be expended on both sides – and there is no guarantee the second organization will win.
GM should have just killed Pontiac and Oldsmobile (maybe Buick too) when it became apparent the Sloan ladder had collapsed.