Captive Import Subcompacts

kernals12

Banned
In 1970, the first All-American subcompacts rolled off the assembly line. Most of them were terrible. There was the Chevrolet Vega which had a habit of blowing head gaskets and the Ford Pinto which gained a reputation for bursting into flames. Only little AMC came out with a reasonably good subcompact, the Gremlin, and even that was widely panned for its styling, the result of taking the larger Hornet and lobbing off the trunk.

Vega_Pinto_Gremlin_in_Massachusetts_2010.JPG



Now, GM and Ford were capable of producing non awful small cars. You only need to look at their European divisions. The Ford Escort, introduced in 1968, was a huge sales hit and had a positive reputation.
images


So did GM's West German built Opel Kadett, which in fact was sold in Buick dealers simply as the Opel.
1200px-Opel_Kadett_B_Westhausen_2015.JPG


Chrysler opted to go with the captive import route. In fact they did it with two cars: the Mitsubishi Colt was imported as a Dodge and from their British division, the Hillman Avenger was imported as the Plymouth Cricket. The Cricket was typically 1970s British in its quality and sold poorly before it was removed from the market in 1973 after just 2 years. The Colt however did very well.

So what if Ford imported the Escort instead of designing the Pinto and the Opel Kadett got rebadged as a Chevrolet instead of having the Vega?
 
The pinto turned out to be a very good car. It was well built except for not putting that $0.29 piece that will keep the gas tank from exploding in severe rear-end crashes. I'm not defending Ford or the pinto.
 
I personally like the pairing of Opel to Buick, taking Opel up market on par with luxury Buick rather than economy focused under Chevrolet. It might hasten the shift to the Euro sport/luxury image and excellence paradigm at GM and thus Detroit and the USA. We need to know why design, engineering and manufacture of a new platform in the USA was better than importing the potentially lower volume captives? As captive imports we get economies of scale that should raise profits, but is it transportation, tariffs, regulatory, labor, or what that propels Corporate to simply pencil out yet another model, add another line and build one more product? In OTL it appears the European divisions were behind Detroit, the red haired step children, the Made in USA appears too favored, so in my pondering I altered Europe and moderated the American success story, it accelerates the value of global branding, cross platforms and captive imports, both directions.
 

SwampTiger

Banned
I agree Opel paired well with Buick to some extent. However, Buick's clientele were not amenable to small cars. Economy cars were the realm of Chevrolet, and to a lesser extent Pontiac. GM should have looked at what other GM markets were doing with captive imports. South Africa, Brazil, Argentina and Australia used various American and European GM platforms at the time. By the early 1970's, increased European labor and materials costs led to the swing to Japanese imports.

South Africa and the South American markets required a minimum amount of local content in vehicles. Thus, CKD kits with local sourced engines, transmissions and interior bits resulted in interesting combinations. GM-South Africa was especially tied to 1950's/60's engines from Chevrolet. The Chevy II fours and sixes were developed into a range of engines. If GM in the US would have given Opel to Pontiac, with a similar requirement to utilize US produced motive pieces, you may have seen sporty two door Opel Mantas, four door sedan and two door wagon 1900/Asconas with versions of uprated Chevy II based fours. South Africa produced such engines in 2.0 l (120 cid), 2.1 l (130 cid), 2.3 l (141 cid) and two variants of the 2.5 l (151 and 153 cid). Pontiac could have used this range to pick and choose variations. A 2.1 base engine would have provided a good high-mileage entry vehicle. Then, a 2.3 engine for the sedan and wagon. The 2.5 long stroke engine for an optional upgrade. The 2.5 short stroke for a Manta base performance engine. Finally, a 2.6 l (163 cid) stroker for a high output engine. By sourcing the Bosch L-Jetronic fuel injection, these engines could have competed with the Ford and Chevy fours and small V-sixes into the 1980's.

Note that I have not included the Mercruiser 140hp/181 cid/3.0 liter engine or crankshaft in this context. The increased vibrations would have made the engines unpalatable for the average American driver. I would expect engine swaps to arise among the hot rodders rather quickly.
 

kernals12

Banned
Ford considered selling a subcompact back in 1960, the Cardinal, it was to have Front Wheel Drive and be a direct competitor to the Volkswagen. It was sadly cancelled at the last minute and the design was given to Ford of Germany and sold as the Taunus.
 

kernals12

Banned
If GM had just gone to Opel for all its small cars, it may still hold 40% of the US market today. They tried it with the J Car that was sold as the Opel Ascona in Germany and as the Chevrolet Cavalier in the US but they chose to use a crappy 1.8 Liter 4 cylinder engine that belonged in a tractor.
 
If GM had just gone to Opel for all its small cars, it may still hold 40% of the US market today. They tried it with the J Car that was sold as the Opel Ascona in Germany and as the Chevrolet Cavalier in the US but they chose to use a crappy 1.8 Liter 4 cylinder engine that belonged in a tractor.

That 1.8/ 122 Engine had no torque, hardly what you want in a tractor. A truly worthless engine family.

When you are outshined by a crappy Pontiac 'Iron Duke' Four, you know you're on the wrong track, and GM stayed on it for decades.

All that time, Saturn had an all aluminum engine with a lot more potential, and it never moved outside Saturn.
 

kernals12

Banned
That 1.8/ 122 Engine had no torque, hardly what you want in a tractor. A truly worthless engine family.

When you are outshined by a crappy Pontiac 'Iron Duke' Four, you know you're on the wrong track, and GM stayed on it for decades.

All that time, Saturn had an all aluminum engine with a lot more potential, and it never moved outside Saturn.
Saturn wound up costing GM $12 billion, so maybe not a model to uphold.
 
Saturn wound up costing GM $12 billion, so maybe not a model to uphold.
Not knowing what to do with a car brand is different problem than not utilizing their capital assets across different divisions.

Saturn had a reasonably lightweight, decent performing Four, and nobody knew about that, it wasn't marketed. In the '90s, GM really needed that for all their smaller cars, so they wouldn't make old VW Beetles have 'peppy' performance in comparison
 

kernals12

Banned
482990.jpg

GM did get things to work when they made Chevrolet build their own version of the T-car under development for Vauxhall, Opel, and Chevrolet Brasil. Unlike the Vega and Citation, the Chevette managed to not be hampered by disastrous quality and despite being slow and having outdated mechanicals, sold well.
 
482990.jpg

GM did get things to work when they made Chevrolet build their own version of the T-car under development for Vauxhall, Opel, and Chevrolet Brasil. Unlike the Vega and Citation, the Chevette managed to not be hampered by disastrous quality and despite being slow and having outdated mechanicals, sold well.

With Manual transmission, not so bad for power, recall, it was the era of the 55mph speed limit.

And was reliable, besides not having atrocious build quality, and was $$$cheap, but didn't seem cheaply made and equipped, like the slightly later Ford Fiesta on 12" tires and even weaker engine
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
The pinto turned out to be a very good car. It was well built except for not putting that $0.29 piece that will keep the gas tank from exploding in severe rear-end crashes. I'm not defending Ford or the pinto.
Well, ya, once you got past the whole roaring sea of flames feature and before the floor pan rusted out. I had a buddy who had to replace his floor boards with, well, floor BOARDS. Footwells rusted out back to where the seats attached on both sides, sheet of 1/2" marine plywood and he was good to go.

I swear the car was stiffer after he put those things in.

482990.jpg

GM did get things to work when they made Chevrolet build their own version of the T-car under development for Vauxhall, Opel, and Chevrolet Brasil. Unlike the Vega and Citation, the Chevette managed to not be hampered by disastrous quality and despite being slow and having outdated mechanicals, sold well.
Ah yes, the only American car in my lifetime where the back seat was an OPTION.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Not knowing what to do with a car brand is different problem than not utilizing their capital assets across different divisions.

Saturn had a reasonably lightweight, decent performing Four, and nobody knew about that, it wasn't marketed. In the '90s, GM really needed that for all their smaller cars, so they wouldn't make old VW Beetles have 'peppy' performance in comparison
The idea behind Saturn was terrific, the problem was that GM dealers couldn't wrap their brain around the idea that it was a bad thing to rape their customers (and I say this as someone who has own more Cameros than most folks on this Board have owned cars). The saddest part is that Saturn introduced the car that could have turned things around, right at the end of the game.

1024px-2009_Saturn_Sky_Redline_Ruby_Red_Limited_Edition.jpg

By Reedred - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7722105

With the 260HP turbo L-4 (290 horse with a "dealer installed" aftermarket breathing kit) the thing went like a striped-assed ape (5.5 0-60, that's a second faster than a 1970 Mach-1 429 SCJ), sexy as hell and actually affordable.
 
The idea behind Saturn was terrific, the problem was that GM dealers couldn't wrap their brain around the idea that it was a bad thing to rape their customers (and I say this as someone who has own more Cameros than most folks on this Board have owned cars). The saddest part is that Saturn introduced the car that could have turned things around, right at the end of the game.

1024px-2009_Saturn_Sky_Redline_Ruby_Red_Limited_Edition.jpg

By Reedred - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7722105

With the 260HP turbo L-4 (290 horse with a "dealer installed" aftermarket breathing kit) the thing went like a striped-assed ape (5.5 0-60, that's a second faster than a 1970 Mach-1 429 SCJ), sexy as hell and actually affordable.

Yeah, Saturn really figured things out a minute before execution with the governor nowhere to be found... incidentally, by captive-importing Opels just as was suggested by the OP.
 

kernals12

Banned
The idea behind Saturn was terrific, the problem was that GM dealers couldn't wrap their brain around the idea that it was a bad thing to rape their customers (and I say this as someone who has own more Cameros than most folks on this Board have owned cars). The saddest part is that Saturn introduced the car that could have turned things around, right at the end of the game.

1024px-2009_Saturn_Sky_Redline_Ruby_Red_Limited_Edition.jpg

By Reedred - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7722105

With the 260HP turbo L-4 (290 horse with a "dealer installed" aftermarket breathing kit) the thing went like a striped-assed ape (5.5 0-60, that's a second faster than a 1970 Mach-1 429 SCJ), sexy as hell and actually affordable.
The Mazda Miata was easier to live with and more fun to drive. And the problem was that the reason people were buying Hondas and Toyotas was not the dealership experience, it was quality.
 
Last edited:

kernals12

Banned
With Manual transmission, not so bad for power, recall, it was the era of the 55mph speed limit.

And was reliable, besides not having atrocious build quality, and was $$$cheap, but didn't seem cheaply made and equipped, like the slightly later Ford Fiesta on 12" tires and even weaker engine
Motorweek tested a 1982 Pontiac 1000 (basically the same car) with automatic. They got a 0-60 time of... 30 seconds. It was as slow as a Citroen 2cv they tested, which has a 2 cylinder engine
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
The Mazda Miata was easier to live with and more fun to drive. And the problem was that the reason people were buying Hondas and Toyotas was not the dealership experience, it was quality.
For family sedans & minivans you are dead right.

Hence the reason for the Sky.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Motorweek tested a 1982 Pontiac 1000 (basically the same car) with automatic. They got a 0-60 time of... 30 seconds. It was as slow as a Citroen 2cv they tested, which has a 2 cylinder engine
The 1976 Chevette (and I just found this now) had almost an identical 0-60 (19.6) and quarter mile (20.3). Yep, it needed a quarter mile long on-ramp to be able to merge onto the freeway. The '81 model, however, was a real factory hot rod, with a full four seconds trimmed off the 0-60 time.

Of course this was the era of smog deadened engines, even the GD Corvette took EIGHT SECONDS to hit 60mph.
 
Top