Tarnished? Halo Cars???????????

[Guest steveskyhawk]

10 tarnished halo cars - Yahoo! Autos

[handmedownreatta]

the new tbirds didn't sell because they were very ugly.

[KDirk]

I know someone who owns one of the "new old" T-birds. Cowl shake is so bad, it makes the worst Reatta 'vert seem rock solid by comparison. And this is apparently not an uncommon problem with the T-birds, as I have heard a lot of complaints about it. The biggest impediment to it's popularity was the price. Simply outrageous. Shaving $10k probably would have made it sell well enough that Ford could have built it's originally intended production allotment. But, they built far short of that as they weren't selling. Kind of funny to pre-announce that a limited number will be built to maintain exclusivity, only to have the actual number produced be even more limited. I think they are decent enough looking cars, but have no desire to ever own one, even in the absence of it's shortcomings.

Inclusion of the Avanti on the list in that article is just stupid. That car did not tarnish Studebaker, as it (the company) was already functionally dead when it was introduced. The Avanti was a last ditch effort to save Studebaker, and was too late to get the job done. May not have helped even with more time, but we will never know. We do know that it continued production under at least three separate ownership entities and even received some minor updates across more 4 decades. I'd say that puts the notion that the car was a dog in doubt.

Some of the other cars I can agree with being failed as halo cars, but that they tarnished their respective companies is doubtful. Nobody says "Buick sucks because they made the Reatta 25 years ago". Buick had plenty of damage to it's reputation in the 80's along with the rest of GM for building boring, dowdy badge engineered products just as every other division of every US car company. They pulled a couple of wildcards in the Reatta and GNX, whilst in the middle of an identity crisis. Once done with those two deviations from the norm, they went back entirely to building sensible cars for the predominately grey-haired demographic. Any problems with Buick's image or reputation at that time were not brought on by the Reatta, so I summarily dismiss the premise of the article with regard to the Reatta out of hand.

The automotive press at the time was generally kind - even enthusiastic - in it's remarks about the Reatta. I don't recall seeing any old articles from the normally import worshiping auto mags (yes I am talking about you Car & Driver) of the day ripping Buick over the Reatta, even if it was somewhat misunderstood in terms of what it was supposed to be (i.e. not a sports car, but looked kind of like one). If those who would normally bag on GM just for being GM were complimentary to the Reatta, then I'd say it wasn't a taint on the company's reputation, lack of sales notwithstanding.

What the article does show is that once again, a two seater is proven to be of limited appeal due to it's impracticality (not suitable as a family car). How many have come and gone (Reatta, TC, T-Bird, MGB, Austin Healy Sprite, Alfa Romeo Spyder, Crossfire, Solstice, Sky, and on and on). Even coupes (2 doors) with a usable back seat are not terribly popular these days. The Eldorado, one of the more notable and long running models is gone, as are the Riviera and Toronado. These models just weren't selling in a market that was dominated by the need (or at least preference) for sedans, minivans and SUV's.

Occasionally, entire segments of the auto business wither and die. Two words: station wagon. These were still hugely popular as family cars when I was a kid in the early-mid 1980's. Within just a couple of years, that market was decimated by mini-vans, and has never come back in the US, excepting the periodic "crossover" that is just this side of a station wagon, and these seem not to sell well as though the public recognizes them for what they really are. Wagons seem to sell ok in Europe, but those BMW, MB and Volvo wagons are all rather smallish compared to the V-8 powered GM, Ford and Chrysler beasts of the 1960's, 70's and 80's.

One last tidbit: Not to malign the TC, but I never knew until now that it had a list price of $33,000 at the outset. That is quite a bit more than the MSRP for a 88 Reatta. Granted, the TC was a convertible. Even then such an asking price at that point in time was simply untenable, it's partial Maserati parentage notwithstanding. Since it was the inspiration for the design of the LeBaron (and not the other way around as some have mistakenly been led to believe) and the Lebaron actually beat it to market at a lower price point, it seems like it was doomed from the start.

KDirk

[padgett]

In 2001 what I wanted was a "bigger Fiero" and found one. Have always liked not-so-small roadsters (early on I had both an MGA and a XK150S. Always liked the Jag better. Later was acquainted with several E-types (last one I bought for $2k needing nothing. Rolled in an autocross. Still need to look at an oil pressure guage periodically.)

Had a number of Corvettes in the '70s including B/P. Have no desire for another.

I find that I like most of those "halo" cars, thought about a Crossfire before I started finding Reatta 'verts mainly because there were a few with manual transmissions. Have to say that of the American (?) mfrs this century I like the Chrysler products the best both from styling and from engineering & voted with my wallet.

BTW the Dodge Magnum Station Wagon -2008 (still sold as the Chrysler 300C Touring but does not look as aggressive) is what I always thought an American SW should look like particularly in a deep brewster green, better even than the Goat Wagon I had while going to GMI and kept for 20 years.

Unfortunately the Magnum was never available with the new Pentastar V6 which I consider the best example of 20 years of design improvement since the Reatta. No lack of power despite a 4400 lb barn door and is getting slightly better MPG than the Reattae.

Edited July 13, 2012 by padgett (see edit history)

[harry yarnell]

Who writes this stuff? I've read similar articles in other publications, and rarely agree with what 'they' decide was a flop. I'm surprized the Aztec or Prowler wasn't on the list, or did I miss it.

I don't call myself The orphange for nothing. I collect automotive art/sculpture.

The Reatta is a beautiful car (til someone said it looked like a catfish); Allante; another beautiful car. The Prowler was an amazing car from a factory. I don't see any of these cars on the road anymore.

I think my next car will be a Saturn Sky...when the prices drop; they're still holding their value.

[wws944]

The Aztec wasn't a 'halo' car. Though it certainly underlined everything wrong with Pontiacs styling team. (Buick did a *much* better job with the Rendezvous - which shared the same platform.) Prowler was originally a Plymouth, until Plymouth was axed, and was a halo car. Not sure how a potential Prowler customer could have been steered to one of their minivans or the 'me-too' compact cars that Plymouth was selling at the time.

The problem with Studebaker was that they had been suffering for many years with high internal costs, relatively poor products, and poor sales as a result. Avanti was a pretty nifty car in its day though. A co-worker of mine, about 20 years ago, had one. His was post-Studebaker, so had the Chevy engine in it. They were 'hand made' cars for each customer to your specs.

The Sky/Solstice were neat cars and apparently have a nice following. I have often thought that an enlightened Buick could have picked it up and made a "Reatta II" out of it, after Pontiac and Saturn were axed. But I fear it would have suffered the same fate as the original Reatta. Mixed luxury/sport messages, dealers who wouldn't have a clue how to sell it, and confused customers who would reject it because they couldn't put a bag of golf clubs in the trunk (unlike the original Reatta.)

[Bushwack]

I'm always on the lookout for a Saturn Sky (Red line) or Prowler. The average 4 yr old Sky with 30M miles is fetching 70% of its original value. Drive one around for a week and it's a hoot! The main negative is (besides is plastic-like interior), when stepping out of a Reatta (or XLR) into a Sky, you realize how cramped the cockpit is. But once you get comfy, you're good to go. If you have more than a few pounds to lose, this isn't the car for you.

As for the Prowler, society seems to re-live the 1950s every 20-25 years, If you recall, the 1970s & 1990s couldn't get enough 1950s flavor mixed in to pop culture. Last decade, pop culture was all over the 60s (i.e.: resurrection of the Camaro & Mustang). Since the 70s and 80s are decades many would soon forget, pop culture will re-visit the 50s again within the next 3-5 years. It will be then that Prowler, with that modern "50's" look, will re-capture some attention.

Aztec. I think the Aztech will have the same sentiments among enthusiasts as the VW Thing. But at least with the Thing, it can be dismantled and re-assembled (helps with re-location).

[Guest steveskyhawk]

All "halo" cars are intended to do is generate enthusiasm or increase traffic in the showroom. It always surprises me when this discussion comes up. We're these cars really ment to turn a profit? If the Reatta indirectly increased the sales of other Buick models the wasn't it a success? I believe they call this a loss leader

[padgett]

Loss Leader is usually a decontented car designed to meet a price point. In the late '60s both a four speed and an automatic were "optional extras at slight additional cost" (about 10% more) so there needed to be a three speed manual transmission available. At the time there was not a three speed in the GM inventory that could handle the torque of a 400+ engine so Pontiac bought three speeds from Ford. In 1967-69 you could order (no dealer stocked) a 400 or 428cid Grand Prix with a three speed manual transmission from Ford.

Today there are a number of decontented cars designed for loss leader and fleet sales but usually almost anything extra (like a towing package) will require certain expensive mandatory options. First of these I saw was on the Z-28 Camaro in 1968.

[Guest steveskyhawk]

I know this is off topic but I believe Padgett will be able to add to my story. When I was in high school (1969) I had a job as a "lot boy". Every afternoon at about 3:30 I was required to go to DMV. I was instructed to take the dealer plates and put them on any used car I wanted and go. (I took new cars and was scolded). In any case one day I walked out to the used car line and made my choice. If my memory is correct I picked a 1966 Pontiac Catalina or Bonneville. It was a Maui Blue convertible with white interior and a white top. When I looked inside it had a "Hurst" 4 speed shifter. I looked under the hood and it had 3 two barrels with the little air cleaners.

I would love to have that car today. Does anybody know how fast it will go? I can't tell you either. The speedometer stopped going up at 120 and it was still accelerating.

They fired me for what I did with the new "Boss 302"

I did a burn out inside the building while a drive wheel was sitting on a drainage grate. Seemed like the thing to do at the time.