Some of those are distinctly unfair... namely, the Chevette, which was a decent car that stayed in production far too long... the 1st-gen Saturn, that was really a very good car (it's what GM did with Saturn after that which is the problem)... the EV1, while a PR problem was the only thing they could do. I'll even defend the X-Car a little and say the proportions were actually attractive and that it was a pretty decent car overall, though lemons abounded.
Exactly my thought. I actually wonder how they even thought GM had a reputation that could be damaged. Maybe they built a decent cars before my day (pre 80s), but as long as I've been around they've only been known for building POS.
Dude, you cannot tell me the Chevy Celebrity is a POS. Sure they're ugly, slow and handle like a cow on mescaline, but you cannot kill those cars.
The A-car was actually pretty good when it came out. However, GM was pretty much the worst at keeping designs around for an eternity and there was a revoultion in the mid-size class when the Taurus debuted and the imports started to grow into the class. The Pontiac 6000STE was named Car and Driver's 10 Best back in the day. Also, it's completely irrelevant what the car was 25+ years ago when you are looking to buy a new car today. I also think the article in several cases is judging old cars by modern standards.
I drove a 91 Chevy Cavalier to 180,000 miles on the original clutch. And it was still running strong when we got rid of it. POS? I think not.
