Chevy TrailBlazer, TrailBlazer SS and GMC Envoy Forum banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Banned
2004 gmc envoy_slt_xuv
Joined
·
447 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
After the head of Global GM Vehicle engineering ,
[/IMG]
Jim Queen ( Alfalfa) decimated GM's midsize truck engineering team there are no longer enough engineers remaining to do another 360 /370 model in the future, as all resources are dedicated to the crossovers, that Jims wife Lori Queen manages.

This is what I am now working on and have brought 2 other GM 360/370 engineers over to the company with me, and hopefully there will be more in the future. (I get at least 1 reference request each week)

[/IMG]

These former 360/370/305 people are some of the best truck engineers in the world, now they are working on the future Military vehicle programs for the US. Great job Jim and the executive team at GM! Well at least you have your golden parachutes!
 

·
Banned
2006 chevy trailblazer_ss_ls
Joined
·
7,988 Posts
There are plenty of numbers left to stick behind "GMT". If there ever comes a day when the mid-sized truck makes a return, they'll simply find someone else to engineer it.
 

·
Banned
2004 gmc envoy_slt_xuv
Joined
·
447 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
There are plenty of numbers left to stick behind "GMT". If there ever comes a day when the mid-sized truck makes a return, they'll simply find someone else to engineer it.
ya think??? I was there it took over 1000 engineers all fully trained and on the program almost 5 years and almost 1 billion in development costs to make it happen, by the way and with all these resources the 360 was still 1 year over schedule. Chrysler beat us to market with the Durango by something like 15 months. It will never happen iagain n GM, not in my lifetime, and not in this country??/ Why do you think GM is BROKE???

Anyways Alfalfas mission was to eliminate the midsize truck engineering team. Do you think that GM will just reassemble a new team of enginners or contract engineers, train them, reengineer the vehicle to the latest standards and dump almost a cool billion into a new midsize truck????LOL LOL BTW it does not matter how many engineers are out of work in Detroit...Aint ever gonna happen. GM will only do the GMT 900 full size trucks and 355 Isuzu engineered POS ricers from here on in nothing else!
 

·
Banned
2006 chevy trailblazer_ss_ls
Joined
·
7,988 Posts
There are plenty of numbers left to stick behind "GMT". If there ever comes a day when the mid-sized truck makes a return, they'll simply find someone else to engineer it.
Guess I should have emphasized that part the first time.:rolleyes:

Because, if the mid-sized truck ever does make a return, GM will assemble a teem and spend the money to develope it. Otherwise, they'll miss out.
 

·
Banned
2004 gmc envoy_slt_xuv
Joined
·
447 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Guess I should have emphasized that part the first time.:rolleyes:

Because, if the mid-sized truck ever does make a return, GM will assemble a teem and spend the money to develope it. Otherwise, they'll miss out.
yep, sure they will Sam, Senators Barney Frank, and Nancy Pelosi will just open up the treasury and give GM say a half to 3/4 billion to reengineer the trucks, and they will retool Moraine, Linden or Oklahoma city to allow GM to get back in the game. Not to be argumenative, but it wont happen. GM is nearly a dead company, and I am not a critic, but someone with 14 years, a bunch of friends and a pension still vested in that company.

GM's demise is one of the saddest things that has occured in my life. All the engineeers and workers GONE, but Jim Queen (Alfalfa) has his golden parachute! LOL
 

·
Banned
2006 chevy trailblazer_ss_ls
Joined
·
7,988 Posts
I guess you keep missing my point. And I'm thinking it would be a waste of time trying to explain myself.
 

·
Registered
2006 gmc envoy_denali
Joined
·
56 Posts
ya think??? I was there it took over 1000 engineers all fully trained and on the program almost 5 years and almost 1 billion in development costs to make it happen, by the way and with all these resources the 360 was still 1 year over schedule. Chrysler beat us to market with the Durango by something like 15 months. It will never happen iagain n GM, not in my lifetime, and not in this country??/ Why do you think GM is BROKE???

Anyways Alfalfas mission was to eliminate the midsize truck engineering team. Do you think that GM will just reassemble a new team of enginners or contract engineers, train them, reengineer the vehicle to the latest standards and dump almost a cool billion into a new midsize truck????LOL LOL BTW it does not matter how many engineers are out of work in Detroit...Aint ever gonna happen. GM will only do the GMT 900 full size trucks and 355 Isuzu engineered POS ricers from here on in nothing else!
You seem very bitter. I prefer optimism by hoping that GM can turn things around and continue to improve their products. While I am not a fan of the Lambda (sp?) platform, I understand the need for it at this time. Instead of being so negative, why not be thankful for the GMT360s we have and hope GM survives and thrives in the future? :m2:
 

·
Banned
2004 gmc envoy_slt_xuv
Joined
·
447 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
You seem very bitter. I prefer optimism by hoping that GM can turn things around and continue to improve their products. While I am not a fan of the Lambda (sp?) platform, I understand the need for it at this time. Instead of being so negative, why not be thankful for the GMT360s we have and hope GM survives and thrives in the future? :m2:
bitter would be a good way of putting it, thankful for the 360 and 370 and 305, well I am that, it learned so much about vehicle design from these progtams, but thr fact is the midsize platform is dead FOREVER and not because of market forces, but because of that VP of engineering Jim Queen. Hes the one who through pure vengence after the retirement of GM VP of truck engineering Tom Davis (The father of the 360 370 for those who dont know) destroyed GM truck engineering, and replaced the chief engineers with his cronnies.

My bitterness also resides in the fact that although I pray for GM to survive, I have enough knowledge to know there will not be funding for another Body on frame miI size truck program under the tenure of Jim (Alfalfa) Queen.

Thats my only point, these are the last and I guess Sam will never quite be able to understand that is my only point. He seems convinced if there was market demand that GM would respond, but I have good knowledge of what it takes to stand up an engineering worforce and a design new program simultaneously. Even during full empoyment GM could not even do the engineering for the Colorado (Outsourced the design and manufacturing to the Japanese for the 355)

GM is broke, cant borrow money, wont be able to do so for many years. The money is gone, and GM will only be able to work with the grocery getter Lambda or that POS Ricer designed 355 platform (if you want a vehicle with decade old engineering), or if you are a die hard and want a monster for daily transportation the GMT 900 will be revised in 5 years, if GM can hold on that long

Does anyone think with GM on life support from the US government that they would have the 1/2 - 3/4 billion to spend to do a new BOF midsize truck even if the market wanted them (which it does)?? Again my only point is our trucks are it, and I guess thats what this site is really all about ...to keep em running and improve them!
 

·
Registered
2004 chevy trailblazer_ls
Joined
·
1,786 Posts
I think the writing was on the wall a long time that the GMT-360 was going to be the last in its class. The market was changing as more soccer moms and people who really didn't want a true SUV demanded from the manufacturers, hey, we want fuel economy, we want ride quality, we want space, yet, don't make it a minivan and definitely don't make it a station wagon. These are the people we really should blame. SUV's use to be the most basic vehicles, roll-up windows, powerful V8's, full-body on frame design, solid rear axles. Well, when people saw the versatility of them, and the craze started in the late 80's early 90's and manufacturers saw green. It didn't take a lot of money to design and build these vehicles. Look at the S10/Sonoma/Blazer/Jimmy. Frame and pretty much the powertrain was the same for two generations. Sure, put in leather, power everything, and tack on 5-10 thousand on MSRP even though it only costs us 1,000.

When GM saw the trend, they probably figured, lets finish teh GMT-360's and figure out another way to make the compact trucks. Oh, wait, we have Isuzu, the made a pretty good truck in teh 70's and 80's, lets hire them to design it. Since the GMT-360 is the last of the body on frame, lets fire all the engineers who specialize in this design and find engineers who can do these crossovers. I mean, seriously, how difficult would it be to use the frame of the GMT-360's in what is know the GMT-355. Sure the suspension has to be retuned, but what is really that significantly different from the SUV frame compared to the truck frame. Was there a difference in design for the S10/Sonoma/Blazer/Jimmy frame? This should have been a clear indication that GM wasn't staying in the body-on-frame market in the mid-size suv/trucks. I am sorry, but the GMT-355 is a joke now compared to the competition, and we are not talking about ground breaking trucks either. Probably the most groundbreaking is the Tacoma, and its been out close to or longer than the GMT-355. I would have loved to replace my 1997 Sonoma with another GM compact truck, but I drove one, and looked at one, and I didn't see much of a gain. So I kept my Sonoma, and still have it! I really, really hope GM does not do the same thing as they did with the GMT-360/355 with the GMT-900's. They need to start consolidating platforms much like the Japanese. Trucks/SUVs should be BOF and sold only by Chevy/GMC, Buick/Saturn, they should only sell crossover for both mid-size and full-size. Don't have so much overlay like what is happening with the Lamdas.

Hopefully I made some sense as I think I am just rambling now.... :confused:. :m2:
 

·
Banned
2004 gmc envoy_slt_xuv
Joined
·
447 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I am sorry, but the GMT-355 is a joke now compared to the competition, :
I agree whith a lot of what You say and you raise some very good points, I would like to clarify some differences I have that come from being in the belly of the GM beast when these decisions were made.

1. The Lambda crossovers were concepted and designed to be grocery getters and everything a truck is not as you say ride like a car get good gas mileage etc

2. The 360/370/305 were never intended to be replaced by the Lambda, but rather the Lambdas were a complement to the BOF truck portfolio. I offer as evidence of this the conversion of the Oklahoma city plant in late 2003 to produce 370's and 305's. The plant shut down 2 years after it was converted , sales were not sufficent to support both Moraine and OKC plants. GM concepted the Lambda triplets in 1998. The OKC plant was converted to a truck plant in 2004, bad timing, but the 500 million committment shows GM was committed to the 360/370/305 even when plans were being made to break ground for the Lansing plant that builds the Lambda POS triplets

3. Jim (Alfalfa) Queen took over GM engineering from Tom Davis (Father of 360/370 and 361(SSR). Tom Davis got Prostrate cancer and cashed in his chips with GM at age 50 in 2002. This left his nemesis Jim (Alfalfa) Queen in charge of all of GM engineering. Tom felt that GM trucks engineering was in great shape and would thrive. He was wrong. reference a recruitment dinner at Harvard Business school where Jim (Alfalfa) Queen said to a group of candidates with his King sized ego - "I am going to tear tthis company apart" He did , tore everthing Tom Davis had built apart in favor of his car group which had suffered years of under funding during Tom Davis's rein at GM truck. ALL The money went to GM Truck programs in the mid to late 90's

4. Jim (Alfalfa) Queen pulled the plug on the 360 /370 redesign in 2006. Marketing money for the 360 / 370 was pulled shortly there after, The GMT 360 /370 trucks were destined to die by this act not by market demends. The Lambda POS triplets were already in production when the redesign plug was pulled but by that time 75 million had already been spent un the 360/370 redesign.

5. The 355 POS ricers were not designed after firing the 360 /370 engineers. It was outsourced to Isuzu because thre were not enough of us to do the program. We could not even get engineers out of college in 1999. They wanted to go to the dot coms. The 355's were designed CONCURRENTLY with the 380/370 trucks. The 360 engineers were working 7 days a week and could not take on the work load. The 355 Isuzu engineering program was a certified fiasco, it started at the same time as the 360 program and was introduced almost 2 years later than the 360 (so much for superior Jampanese vechicle development), and the 360 was a costly programthat also over ran budget and schedule. (The screwed up suspension bears this out)

6.GM did not fire the engineeres , just attricianed the best of the best into retirement.

7. GM is broke and on Government life support. Ford and Toyota will now take over what remains of the Mid size BOF SUV Market.

It is very sad. Sorry about the writing a book. I just am so frustrated to see all of GM truck engineering decimated by this POS -
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,559 Posts
After reading this entire thread it seems as that the original poster put this in the wrong forum. (sarcasm intended)

It is in the "Chat" forum and a chat generally allows differing points of view instead of a 1 sided diatribe against 1 individual.

If anyone would like to "Chat" about anything involving the original title with new information please feel free to post.
 

·
Registered
2007 gmc
Joined
·
11,894 Posts
I agree whith a lot of what You say and you raise some very good points, I would like to clarify some differences I have that come from being in the belly of the GM beast when these decisions were made.

1. The Lambda crossovers were concepted and designed to be grocery getters and everything a truck is not as you say ride like a car get good gas mileage etc

2. The 360/370/305 were never intended to be replaced by the Lambda, but rather the Lambdas were a complement to the BOF truck portfolio. I offer as evidence of this the conversion of the Oklahoma city plant in late 2003 to produce 370's and 305's. The plant shut down 2 years after it was converted , sales were not sufficent to support both Moraine and OKC plants. GM concepted the Lambda triplets in 1998. The OKC plant was converted to a truck plant in 2004, bad timing, but the 500 million committment shows GM was committed to the 360/370/305 even when plans were being made to break ground for the Lansing plant that builds the Lambda POS triplets

3. Jim (Alfalfa) Queen took over GM engineering from Tom Davis (Father of 360/370 and 361(SSR). Tom Davis got Prostrate cancer and cashed in his chips with GM at age 50 in 2002. This left his nemesis Jim (Alfalfa) Queen in charge of all of GM engineering. Tom felt that GM trucks engineering was in great shape and would thrive. He was wrong. reference a recruitment dinner at Harvard Business school where Jim (Alfalfa) Queen said to a group of candidates with his King sized ego - "I am going to tear tthis company apart" He did , tore everthing Tom Davis had built apart in favor of his car group which had suffered years of under funding during Tom Davis's rein at GM truck. ALL The money went to GM Truck programs in the mid to late 90's

4. Jim (Alfalfa) Queen pulled the plug on the 360 /370 redesign in 2006. Marketing money for the 360 / 370 was pulled shortly there after, The GMT 360 /370 trucks were destined to die by this act not by market demends. The Lambda POS triplets were already in production when the redesign plug was pulled but by that time 75 million had already been spent un the 360/370 redesign.

5. The 355 POS ricers were not designed after firing the 360 /370 engineers. It was outsourced to Isuzu because thre were not enough of us to do the program. We could not even get engineers out of college in 1999. They wanted to go to the dot coms. The 355's were designed CONCURRENTLY with the 380/370 trucks. The 360 engineers were working 7 days a week and could not take on the work load. The 355 Isuzu engineering program was a certified fiasco, it started at the same time as the 360 program and was introduced almost 2 years later than the 360 (so much for superior Jampanese vechicle development), and the 360 was a costly programthat also over ran budget and schedule. (The screwed up suspension bears this out)

6.GM did not fire the engineeres , just attricianed the best of the best into retirement.

7. GM is broke and on Government life support. Ford and Toyota will now take over what remains of the Mid size BOF SUV Market.

It is very sad. Sorry about the writing a book. I just am so frustrated to see all of GM truck engineering decimated by this POS -

While I understand and appreciate your feelings about this, It seems as though this thread has turned from informational to a grudge vent. We understand where you are coming from and the point has been made... but repeating yourself over and over is not going to change anyones minds or feelings.

I am beginning to feel as though you are trying to turn us against GM... if that is the case, you are on the wrong forum. We are here to enjoy our vehicles, not bring ourselves down.

__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
458 Posts
well, guess if I ever want a new true SUV im going to get a xterra, At least it has an aftermarket. Its bs, I really like these trucks. What i want to know is what they are going to start buying for work trucks at the company (civil engineering firm) I intern for. Currently its about 90% trailblazers/envoys. The other vehicles are the older ones needing replacement soon, tahoes and s10's.

The very reason i bought a trailblazer was because I saw how these rigs held up to this kind of abuse and how well they worked out for the job I will be doing in the future. They are also kind of a symbol of the company, there is no logo on the side but everyone knows one of the burke guys is pulling up when they see the TB pullin into the site.

I don't think the lambda platform will hold up to the abuse of driving around jobsites like the trailblazers have. Its always been GM vehicles for us but i sense a switch here in the future.
 

·
Registered
2004 chevy trailblazer_ls
Joined
·
1,786 Posts
If you asked me two years ago, which manufacturer made the best trucks, hands down it would be GM. You ask me know... I may be reluctant to say GM. Its a real shame. If GM is still around, I don't know what I would get. Maybe a full size truck (hopefully its not a Ridgeline type vehicle on a Lambda platform), Pontiac G8, Cadillac CTS (wagon maybe?), or maybe the Camaro. The rest of the lineup, I would have to do a double take. I am not really impressed with what is coming in the pipelines. Hopefully GM can change that when I am in the market in about 4-6 years :eek::cry::ugh:.

billdaman, its good to hear about the background of how vehicles are developed, seeing design sketches, layouts, new technologies, etc,. Guess that's the engineering background in me, but it sucks about the "politics" that can happen like what you mentioned. Got any other info about the GMT-360's that aren't that "politcal" maybe? :ugh:

Cheers,
 

·
Banned
2004 gmc envoy_slt_xuv
Joined
·
447 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Got any other info about the GMT-360's that aren't that "politcal" maybe? :ugh:

Cheers,
I have lots of little mementos and tech information attached to these vehicles, nothing propriatary in nature.

One thing that comes to mind in 360 heritage is the connection between the GMT 360 and the SSR (368). The SSR was based on the 360 architecture and was designed engineered and built by ASC ( American Sunroof Corporatioon). Although the original sketch for the SSR was said to have originated in GM;s design studio by Wayne Cherry as it turns out ASC's design chief showed me the original sketches in confidence. The concept was in fact his, but no GM vehicle could wear the badge if it didnt originate from GM's design studio, so he had to forgo credit for what was infact his design for a beautiful vehicle.

Ted Robertson was the GM Chief engineer for the 360/70/05 vehicles. He retired from GM under the political pressure you mentioned in 2003. He then went to work for ASC and was the Chief engineer for the SSR 368. I loved working with this guy, a true leader, and I was one of the few GM engineers on the program, as 100% on the design of the body was ASC and the retractable hardtop was Karmann.

The 361 was the baby of GM Truck VP Tom Davis that I mentioned in some of my eariler ramblings. The 361 was an unbekievable vehicle program to work on, but in the end a complete financial failure. Because of its status as a Halo vehicle GM alwas expected to just break even on the SSR and get people into showrooms

Instead ASC suffered near financial ruin because of the huge investment they made ina facility to build up the vehicle subassemblies in Lansing. They lost everything

If the 361 had succeeded a host of other 360 variants were on the boards and would be produced by American Sunroof. Again a disappointment, so much potential. I wonder what has become of Ted Robertson? He would be a great person to have a a Trailvoy meet to sign dashs, or the Great Studio Chief for the 360/370/305 Bill Davis.

Now getting one or both of those guys to show up a a meet would be a super thing!
 

·
Banned
2004 gmc envoy_slt_xuv
Joined
·
447 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
While I understand and appreciate your feelings about this, It seems as though this thread has turned from informational to a grudge vent. We understand where you are coming from and the point has been made... but repeating yourself over and over is not going to change anyones minds or feelings.

I am beginning to feel as though you are trying to turn us against GM... if that is the case, you are on the wrong forum. We are here to enjoy our vehicles, not bring ourselves down.
Actually I appologize first and formost for being a bore. I dont believe I actually said anything bad about the 360/70/05, which is what this forum is about, rather that I love these vehicles because they are truly a part of who I am,

The rest of what you say is true, I slammed a couple of GM's current platforms and thats negative and boring and I didnt let up , again boring,

I woke up a couple of days after Christmas thought about the closure of Moraine and the people out of work and decided to throw arrows where I felt they belonged. Thanks for setting me straight. A forum is supposed to be fun and is in fact a business. bores are bad!
 

·
Registered
2004 chevy trailblazer_ls
Joined
·
1,786 Posts
I have lots of little mementos and tech information attached to these vehicles, nothing propriatary in nature.

One thing that comes to mind in 360 heritage is the connection between the GMT 360 and the SSR (361). The SSR was based on the 360 architecture and was designed engineered and built by ASC ( American Sunroof Corporatioon). Although the original sketch for the SSR was said to have originated in GM;s design studio by Wayne Cherry as it turns out ASC's design chief showed me the original sketches in confidence. The concept was in fact his, but no GM vehicle could wear the badge if it didnt originate from GM's design studio, so he had to forgo credit for what was infact his design for a beautiful vehicle.

Ted Robertson was the GM Chief engineer for the 360/70/05 vehicles. He retired from GM under the political pressure you mentioned in 2003. He then went to work for ASC and was the Chief engineer for the SSR 361. I loved working with this guy, a true leader, and I was one of the few GM engineers on the program, as 100% on the design of the body was ASC and the retractable hardtop was Karmann.

The 361 was the baby of GM Truck VP Tom Davis that I mentioned in some of my eariler ramblings. The 361 was an unbekievable vehicle program to work on, but in the end a complete financial failure. Because of its status as a Halo vehicle GM alwas expected to just break even on the SSR and get people into showrooms

Instead ASC suffered near financial ruin because of the huge investment they made ina facility to build up the vehicle subassemblies in Lansing. They lost everything

If the 361 had succeeded a host of other 360 variants were on the boards and would be produced by American Sunroof. Again a disappointment, so much potential. I wonder what has become of Ted Robertson? He would be a great person to have a a Trailvoy meet to sign dashs, or the Great Studio Chief for the 360/370/305 Bill Davis.

Now getting one or both of those guys to show up a a meet would be a super thing!

That would be super if that could happen. To bad we couldn't have a meet at the factory with the people who designed and built the vehicles.

I remembered some of the technical aspects of the SSR and companies involved. It was a great concept and would have liked to have one, but like you said, cost was a factor to its demise. For the same price, you could get a Corvette :ugh:! What GM should have done was build the SSR with a non-retractable roof, would have reduced cost significantly. I think GM new it would be a low production vehicle, but I just don't understand why they tried to make it so expensive. I think it would have sold well if it sold for around $25-$30 thousand instead of the $40,000+ if I remembered the pricing. If i recall, the frame was used from the extended verison of the GMT-360 and basically used the parts bin to further reduce cost. The only "halo" vehicle GM did right was the Pontiac Solstice :m2:.
 

·
Registered
2002 chevy trailblazer_ls
Joined
·
1,667 Posts
You said it best when you said, "Again my only point is our trucks are it, and I guess thats what this site is really all about ...to keep em running and improve them!" I feel like that could be made into some form of mission statement for TrailVoy.

It would be great if GM found a way to have a diverse portfolio, yet not be spread so thin. By having the same car available in 3-5 different trim levels on 3-4 brands is just chaotic.

I'll be in the market for a new TrailVoy or GMT900 in about 3-4 years, I think, so hopefully things will be going well for them.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top