04 Ion- IS IT TRUE ????

is it true ??? last year for the plastic body panels, last year for the 5 speed and, sadly, last real Saturn .... ? say it ain't so, E

Reply to
EDeneen
Loading thread data ...

Not the last year. There should be 2 more years before that happens.

Jim

>
Reply to
Seamus's Stuff

I was told this too - but didn't believe it. One of the only reasons I have continued to buy Saturns is because of this unique feature (among others.) I think it is unfortunate that GM wants Saturn to become so integrated with it's control that it is losing everything that is unique about it. Soon it will be another generic car with similar but slightly different body panels (eg: Camaro/Firebird syndrome OR Cavalier/Sunfire syndrome, etc. etc.)...I think it's a mistake, and one that will cost Saturn and GM. I guess the price of oil makes the plastic panels too expensive to make anymore! As far as the 5 speed - that is the AUTOMATIC 5-speed...it had too much "gear indecision" (as I call it) so the 4-speed automatic will replace it. (And, maybe a 6-speed will replace the 5-speed manual tranny!)

Reply to
Warren

All speculation and rumours for now so not to worry. The rumour of the polymer panels being fazed out only pertains to the upcoming Relay Van. There is talk of going from 5 to 6 speed in the ION. Polymer is here to stay - for now. But then Saturn engineers are like the weather in Florida, just wait a few minutes and it'll change again. I also agree that if they do away with the polymer panels it will greatly influence Saturn loyalty.

marx404 saturnofstuart.com

Reply to
marx404

GM was always in control of Saturn. after all it was their $$$$$$ that created Saturn. to think otherwise is mere folly.

Reply to
twinkie

There is only a couple of more years for polymer panels on Saturn products. How do I know this....My boss...General Motors...has told me this. And if GM does not convert Spring Hill to steel panels not only will polymer panels be gone from Saturn products....so will I from GM employment, as Spring Hill Manufacturing will be no more.

So if you like cars/SUV's with polymer panels, get them now while they are still being produced. I liked them well enough I have 2 Lumina APV minivans in my driveway. Just wish that the manufacturing world liked them as much as I do.

Jim

Reply to
Seamus's Stuff

Many years ago there was a PBS show on Saturn and the factory. Made a big deal of how all the panels for a particular car were made from the same batch of plastic. Then in another scene they showed where imperfect panels were dumped. What I found amusing was that logic would follow that if one panel for a car was bad, all panels should be dumped but the pile seemed to be individual panels. I'm sure there's a good explanation but kind of amusing.

Reminded me of another PBS special on building the Boeing 777 jet. They had a new door design and wanted to make sure that the door could be opened after being very cold 30000 feet above the earth. So they took the assembly and put it in a freezer overnight and were happy that the door opened the next day. Seemed to me to be a defective test since the inside of the assembly should have been kept at room temperature.

Reply to
Art

It sounds like in a couple of years there won't be anything different about Saturn anymore, so why would it exist? Actually "Saturn" is already gone since there aren't anymore cars called "Saturn". There are IONs, VUEs and Relays, but saying you drive a Saturn isn't anymore descriptive than saying you drive a GM. I kind of miss the alphabet soup, C, L, S, & W, in what ever order you pleased. ron

94 SATURN SL-1
Reply to
Ron Herfurth

""If you find something you really, really like, buy a lifetime supply; because it'll either be changed for the worse or go out of production."

No doubt the accountants weighed the extra cost of the polymer panels against the number of lost sales that they believe will result from dropping them. The polymer panel over sub-frame approach was supposed to be cheaper, but never was. The manufacturing cost of the polymer panels, the yield, and the problems associated with painting them, made them more costly than steel. The need for a sub-frame also raised the cost. Furthermore, there was no safety increase with polymer over steel, versus steel alone, just look at the crash test results.

Reply to
Steven M. Scharf

It did involve cost...but not those. It was the cost to convert every other plant from steel to polymer...and the cost of having only one plant that can build polymer panel cars/trucks. Since we were the only one out there. We can not build any other product GM makes at our plant. With GM moving to the flexibility of any plant being able to build most any product. We were becoming a large cost to the company. So either we change....or the accountants get rid of the dead weight. I think you can figure out why we said change...

Jim

Reply to
Seamus's Stuff

Don't you kind of miss the good old days when GM would build a plant that could make a million of one model and its twins and nothing else whether they could sell them or not. Nissan did the same and it almost put them out of business.

Reply to
Art

The crash test results only tell part of the story. The final selling point when I purchased TWO (2) Saturns at the same time was the picture from the local newspaper of an SL2 with a full milk tanker sitting on the SL2's roof. The occupants of the SL2 opened the doors and walked out. Try that without a sub-frame. The sub-frame and the polymer panels were the only thing keeping me from Toyota. GM has burned me with their garbage too many times. The only good GM products I had were two Oldsmobiles and GM killed them, too. Do we see a pattern whereby GM kills the good parts and keeps the garbage?

Reply to
<joe

But the chances of being involved in this sort of accident are far, far, lower than being involved in the type of head-on collisions as are tested for by the IIHS, where Saturn did poorly. They don't have the Ion tests, but you can see the Saturn SL tests at:

formatting link
Compare Saturn to a Civic,
formatting link
or Corolla:
formatting link
And of course the milk tanker was not being supported by the Saturn's frame, if this happened at all, the car was wedged under the tank.

The fact that the IIHS hasn't received an Ion to test is worrying. Saturn has always done poorly on the IIHS tests, which the experts agree are much more realistic, and tougher, than the NHTSA crash tests.

Saturn attempted to copy Volvo's marketing for safety, without having anything to back it up. Of course the Volvo message is now largely a myth as well, as other automakers have added similar safety features.

formatting link

Reply to
Steven M. Scharf

This link shows an "acceptable" (not "poor") result for a 1997 Saturn SL2. Which is actually not bad for a car with crash protection characteristics essentially from 1996 (but based on a structural design from 1991).

Of course, since the S-series was run for so long without being redesigned, it was gradually passed by in many areas, including crash protection (note that most designs from 2000 or newer have gotten "good" ratings in the IIHS test).

Reply to
Timothy J. Lee

formatting link
looks good to me. Maybe if Scharf wasnt so blinded by his own moronic propaganda and his hatred for Saturn he could see that.

Reply to
Blah Blah

scharf was right about several things over the years. and saturn was always controlled by GM even though many saturn devotees were in denial.

Reply to
twinkie

Right about several things over the years? An effing monkey would be right that often.

Reply to
Box134

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.