Not only did Cadillac’s ill-fated Allante spend a lot of time in the air, to Italy and back, but it was transported domestically in its own special trailers. This one is being hauled by a GMC Astro Aero, which seems to have an accordion-style aerodynamic deflector on its roof.
I do wonder just what the total losses were for the Allante program? Small potatoes compared to the GM-10 program, but still…
And why isn’t there a CC GM Deadly Sin for the Allante? Apparently because I’ve never found one, as the other ones in our archives were a bit too polite to call it a DS. It’s good to know that the GM DS Series still has a ways to go.
Goodness, I had no idea they were transported to the dealer this way, too. It would be really interesting to see the 747? they used to get them from Pininfarina to Hamtramck.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Allante_747.jpg
The Allante was actually one of the few ideas GM got right, at least in theory. Let me explain, prior to Allante most cars and components were all assembled within the same state and usually the same city. Such as Lansing, MI Oldsmobiles for example. Everything was centralized.
After Allante it was okay for car manufacturers to assemble transmissions in Mexico, engines in South Korea, etc. and have the components delivered to the assembly line “just in time” for complete car assembly.
As for flaws, yeah, no power retracting roof, FWD, weak engines until 1993 Northstar and then it was killed.
Also, how was this “international” badge included on Oldsmobiles of the time but not included on this car and how did they manage not to include the Japanese flag on the badge?
Obviously, being General Motors, the idea was flawed because the entire car was shipped around the globe and not the components of the car. But the idea was tweaked and gave us the “globalization” and “centers of excellence” that is pervasive in the auto and other industries today.
“And how did they manage not to include the Japanese flag on the badge?”
Anti-Japanese sentiment, presumably. The presence of many European flags was meant to communicate that the Cutlass Cieras and Calaises (sp?) were legitimate competitors to European sport sedans.
On a smaller scale, in the mid 60’s the Glas GT and V8 bodies of Hans Glas GmbH were built in Italy and then shipped to Dingolfing in Bavaria for final assembly.
You’ve got to be kidding. Seriously?
Assembly plants with various components coming from other factories is as old as the Model T, at least. Ford had assembly plants all over the country, but they did just that: assemble the cars from components.
And then GM and Chrysler did the same thing starting in the 1920s.
There’s a huge difference between a “factory” and “assembly plant”. Ford’s River Rouge was a factory, where almost everything for a car was made. But the rest were assembly plants.
In fact, there have been very few factories were all the major components were made. GM, Ford and Chrysler had its various engine plants and transmission plants and frame plants and suspension plants and interiors plants, etc….
This has been the norm since the 1920s or so.
Do you know how cars are actually made??
Yes. I do. So does American University.
https://www.american.edu/kogod/research/autoindex/
Conclusion
Cars in general are becoming less American over the past few decades. If you look at AALA data on the National Highway and Transportation website from 2007 you can see cars with 95 to 90 percent US/Canadian content compared to the present high of 74 percent for the Dodge Grand Caravan—which is assembled in Canada. There has been a trend for less US/Canadian content because of the globalization of supply chains and the increase in the use of Mexico as a source of parts and components. Also, the 2007 data is difficult to compare to the more recent data because it doesn’t include sources for engines or transmissions. In the 2020 AALA the source of parts and components may be Mexico, Japan, Germany, Korea or even China—depending on the brand.
If we could go back to the 1970s before the AALA legislation was enacted, you would be more likely see an American-made car with domestic content approaching 100%. At that time, the US market was dominated by the big three: GM, Ford, and Chrysler. Parts and components came primarily from the US and Canada. At the time, VW, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan had comparatively small shares of the US market. VW opened a manufacturing facility in Pennsylvania in the late 70s that produced “Americanized” VW Rabbits (the precursor to the Golf) for the US market. Honda, Nissan and Toyota followed with plants in the US in the 80s and 90s. Jaguar, MG, Land Rover, and Triumph from the UK were all imported, as were BMWs and Mercedes from Germany. There were some French imports too: Renault and Peugeot—for example.
As one of the most global industries the automotive industry is in constant flux as new markets in the developing world open and manufacturers shift production into these markets to be closer to consumers and to take advantage of access to cheaper and more plentiful factor endowments. China in particular has evolved into a powerhouse in the industry and we can expect to see an increasing amount of trade between the US and China in terms of auto parts and complete vehicles (depending on the way the political winds blow of course!).
Agreed about cars and car parts being more global. That’s a clear trend.
I was referring to this primary statement of yours:
The Allante was actually one of the few ideas GM got right, at least in theory. Let me explain, prior to Allante most cars and components were all assembled within the same state and usually the same city. Such as Lansing, MI Oldsmobiles for example. Everything was centralized.
After Allante it was okay for car manufacturers to assemble transmissions in Mexico, engines in South Korea, etc. and have the components delivered to the assembly line “just in time” for complete car assembly.
The Allante had absolutely nothing to do with this trend of greater globalization. It was simply about using PF’s plant in Italy to build the body, very similar to what Cadillac had done in 1959-1960 with the Brougham.
This has nothing to do with where the components are sourced. This trend started well before the Allante.
And the second part of your statement about most cars/components being assembled in the same city/state is pure hogwash. I already pointed that out. Almost all Chevy engines since WW2 were made in Towanda, NY. Transmissions in their specific plants. Etc.
As I said, American cars have been assembled from components built all over the country since the time of the Model T, and not in the city/state of where the cars had their final assembly.
Globalism just meant that an increasing number of them came from other countries. And of course NAFTA meant that an increasing number were built in Mexico. Old news.
The Allante had zero to with any of that.
bellwether – an indicator of trends
I disagree. I see the Allante experiment as a bellwether for the entire auto industry in terms of where the industry was when it started and where the industry went almost immediately after the Allante was cancelled and NAFTA became law.
By the end of the century, Chrysler even “merged” with Daimler-Benz.
Today, Buick in America is General Motors new GEO. With a line-up of cars and SUV’s designed, engineered, and sometimes built in whole or in part by Opel-PSA, Daewoo-GM South Korea, GM-China, and a rebadged Chevy Traverse (Enclave).
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bellwether
Sorry Paul, no Chevy engines built in “Towanda”. Maybe Tonawanda NY?
James, sorry, but your assertion that ” most cars and components were all assembled within the same state and usually the same city. Such as Lansing, MI Oldsmobiles for example. Everything was centralized” is incorrect. Very incorrect.
Perhaps at the dawn of the industry, in 1905, Olds was centralized in Lansing.
By the time the industry matured in the 1920s and 1930s, the only such centralized site was Ford’s Rouge Complex.
GM, the best run company, did not follow that model. And eventually, neither did Ford.
Overtime, the Americans discovered that it made more sense to have benefit from economies of scale by having key components, such as stampings (especially, as they are easy to to ‘stack and ship’), transmissions, engines, and later on, power steering pumps, AC compressors in specialized plants and shipping them to assembly plants all over the country.
This reduced costs and made it possible for GM in particular, but also Ford, and even Chrysler most years to make huge profits provided they passed their ‘break even points’, as it leveraged their mass productions know-how and America’s relatively efficient and cheap rail and truck network. From 1918 to the mid-1960s, the USA was indisputably the world’s leader in manufactured goods, in terms of value.
But the clock is relentless. Times change, new ideas emerge…
By the early 1970s, at its peak, GM had assembly plants from California to Montreal, each one making 100,000 to 300,000 units per year.
The more ubiquitous stampings, say floor pans for A-bodies (mid-size cars) might only be made in a couple of stamping plant–they were shipped all over. Similarly, GM did not have Chey engine plants in CA–they were concentrated in the midwest–Michigan, Ontario, upstate NY. Ditto the trans plants, which GM consolidated in the 1960s, with Turbohydramatic taking over from the 5 divisions (who had their own transmissions before–again though, every plant making Buicks did not have a Dynaflow plant next door…uh, no)
GM Assembly plants were large. GM assembly plant managers (THAT is the pay point, after all, not the engines) and manufacturing management would often stock extra parts, just in case of a strike or some other work stoppage, so the assembly plants would always run, barring a strike.
But the extra parts and slack were a form of waste. Until the mid-60s, the Americans could still kick butt even with that type of excess.
How do you think, in 1964-66 Ford made a million Mustangs, when they expected to sell 400k? The “slack” enabled Ford to ‘magically’ dial up the production rates when the Mustang sold over 2x expected–then it was good.
But after the Japanese figured out the fundamental basics of vehicle manufacturing in the early 1960s, on a SMALLER scale, their model, TOYOTA’s model to be precised, superseded the big three.
The Japanese used lean manufacturing techniques to make parts and finished cars efficiently on a smaller scale. THey did not require MASSIVE stamping plants like the big three–they got along just as well with smaller stamping plants. And smaller assembly plants, constructed to build whatever the target volume was, efficiently, be it 100k or 300k. And the plant built THAT volume, no more or less.
The Japanese co-located their smaller stamping plants to their assembly plants. Besides saving on shipping costs, if there was a flaw in a batch of stampings, it was quickly detected and addressed–you didn’t have a long pipe line with a gazillion of them.
Similarly, unlike 70% vertically integrated GM (Ford was 50, Chrysler was 30) in the 1960s/70s/early 80s, the ‘new’ Japanese, particularly Toyota, the biggest and smartest, MADE their components suppliers locate their plants relatively close to the assembly plant, for the same reason.
The Detroit Three were forced to make the best of their system, conceived in the 1940s and 1950s, and honed to brilliance in the 1960s, as it would cost billions to directly emulate the Japanese. Over time, and as they have gotten smaller, the Americans have to a significant extent converged on the Toyota model.
While using the old facilities long past their amortization did save a lot of money, it also carried hidden cost penalties in terms of quality and efficiency.
The Allante was simply a typically made GM car, with a far-flung supply network, in the form of expensive hand-made bodies, shipped via air at HUGE cost, to the Hamtracmk Assembly plant, to be assembled with plebeian look-alike FWD Cadillacs and the other FWD GM full-sizers.
Sadly, like many GM products of my youth, the car looked great, but was very mediocre in terms of powertrain and other areas.
That is the reality of auto manufacturing, as it was in the ICE age. The future may be different. While Elon Musk has successfully repurposed what was Toyota/GM NUMMI plant, and GM’s Fremont Assembly outside Oakland to make Teslas, Tesla still struggles to make their quality and production daily targets, more so perhaps than the Americans or Asians. There “old” automakers have learned a million lessons the hard way, about wind noise or rattles or rust, many of which they STILL must relearn it seems. It’s not rocket science, but there are a million details…
The problem here is that because a vehicle was built economically, does not necessarily mean it was a good vehicle. The good example most would cite would be the Ford Model T.
A bad example would be the Chevy Vega.
Killer comment and the reason this is one of the few sites I’ll read comments on. Thanks for this.
Color-coordinated and pinstriped tractor-trailer. Eleganté!
The transatlantic routine for fancy roadsters wasn’t exactly new… Hudson did it in the ’30s with Railton, and Nash did it in the ’50s with Healey.
Cadillac also did it in the 50s with Pininfarina the Eldorado Brougham.
Forgot about that one. 1959-60, correct?
Yep. Two years only and fewer than 150 units build, IIFC. Massively expensive cars.
Yes, the Aero Astro 95 did have an adjustable roof mounted air defector, its height could be changed to match the trailer. A rare truck, not only did it have the air deflector but it also had an aerodynamic front bumper, grille, and lower cab side skirts. A pretty good attempt to make a cabover more aerodynamic, but the idea didn’t really go anywhere in the U.S. as cabovers were fading in popularity by the mid-80’s. Peterbilt made a similar version of their model 352 for a couple of years.
I would rather have an Aero Astro 95 than an Allante’.
Bob, totally agree, give me the Aero Astro, this is the first one I’ve ever seen! I don’t recall this ever being mentioned at the dealership and it was a factory branch store. Looks like you can put lipstick on an Astro. Hopefully it had a big hp engine, being its hauling GM product maybe a 8V-92 with an Allison.
This may turn out to be a duplicate post, I tried once and it didn’t seem to stick.
Anyway, the first Astro Aeros I recall seeing were in the CRST fleet. I believe they were even more ‘streamlined’ than the pictured Cadillac rig.
I’d bet they were a pre-production fleet test. Seems like they were several years ahead of anything similar.
At the time they were quite a site. Unlike anything else on thevroad. The future had arrived!
Being more interested in the 747 than the Allante, I had to do a little reading.
The chartered 747s flew three trips per week from Turin Caselle to Detroit Metro. Cargo 747s came from both Lufthansa and Alitalia. The return eastbound flights to Europe did not deadhead. Rather the LH 747 took various GM freight to Frankfurt and the AZ 747 returned to Turin with components used in the Allante.
There were 56 bodies carried on each flight to Detroit, double stacked in a unique aluminum cradle.
Very cool, thanks for sharing your findings.
Whenever I think of the Allante, I always remember this “commercial” featuring Kelly Bundy. (Christina Applegate) 😉
Loved that show!
I’m pretty sure the Coyote X from Hardcastle and McCormick is in this scene too
That was the second Coyote X, based on the DeLorean I believe. Supposedly Brian Keith had trouble getting in and out of the original one with smaller doors. I like the original one myself. I think the engine sounds were added in post-production but its only TV anyway. KITT wasn’t really bulletproof and 1969 Chargers can’t jump ravines without damage.
Though I’ve never actually tried it.