I have a few comments for the execs over at Saturn:
1. hiring the guys from the Aztek debacle was not a good idea . . . although the guys left over from Olds did a good job of trying to cover the Aztek guys’ work.
2. The “WOW” of plastic body panels only goes so far to cover up a bad product.
3. If you get anyone in to look at the Ion, you might want to rethink the “no haggle pricing”—people don’t buy Azteks at sticker price.
4. The positive side: If they accept the styling and lack of content, then they could be satisfied with anything; the J.D. Power rating should stay intact.
On a serious note: Listen up, GM, we are not blind. Stop making ugly cars and trying to convince us that the “features” negate the shame of being seen in an ugly car! Kurt Maiershofer, Valencia, California Am I the only one to notice that the Ion seems designed more for ease of assembly than anything else? Instruments in the middle are of the dashboard for solid ergonomic reasons? Please! Looks as though that was the easiest way’s to create a front assembly that can be easily switched to right-hand drive for export markets.
Notice how symmetrical the left and right sides are? The center-mounted instruments just need to be pivoted to the right to serve drivers on that side. I bet the dash molding has cutouts for either side, too. Can anyone confirm if my suspicions are correct? Jane OcHs, New York
Zap! Your road test of the Saturn Ion 3 took me back to my misspent youth when I bought a 1938 Lincoln Zephyr convertible sedan at a local junkyard. Why there? It had thrown one connecting rod of its V12 engine through the oil pan. I grafted in a Ford flathead V-8, and the car survived.
