2016 Detroit Auto Show: 2017 Honda Ridgeline

It will be interesting to see if Honda has really figured this out yet or not. The last one was a great idea but a vast disappointment.

AWD Truck is interesting, I do not think anyone else has ever offered a truck with AWD. Plenty of 4x4 but not AWD.

Pathetic is the V6 engine. So much wasted horsepower with pathetic Torque.

Over all not impressed with the looks or the rest of the truck for that matter.

Continuation of Dull Bland Styling.

WTF, Blah Truck and they get CAR OF THE YEAR?

HONDA has failed on all fronts and the stupid press continues to think they are gods walking on water.

I do not see this selling much at all except for an initial bump to the existing Ridgeline customers who want the same blah trucks.

It scares me......

It's an interesting scenario. One one hand, it appears much more like a 'proper' pick up, whereas the prior version was a bit more unique. Question stands; is that going to be more attractive for honda buyers, or less? IE; now that it feels more 'trucky', will it suffer in comparison to so many established small trucks?

There's no actual cues I can put my finger on, but it has a strong early 2000's look to it.

much better looking, (except the rear doors look out of proportion) ....should appeal to Honda bangers.....interior does not look trucky at all,

this thing does have a following, looks like a good update for those that liked the last one.

I just don't understand why anyone would buy of these. The GM twins, and hell, even the Tacoma, offer such good road manners, you'd have to be dumb to throw away their off-road ability and ruggedness for what will undoubtedly be vehicle that costs the same but is vastly inferior in so many ways.

I think Honda should have just left the Ridgeline name to history. Use the money to give as a new S2K.

I just don't understand why anyone would buy of these. The GM twins, and hell, even the Tacoma, offer such good road manners, you'd have to be dumb to throw away their off-road ability and ruggedness for what will undoubtedly be vehicle that costs the same but is vastly inferior in so many ways.

 

I think Honda should have just left the Ridgeline name to history. Use the money to give as a new S2K.

I 100% agree here.   Can't speak on the 16 Tacoma, but the Colorado Z71 I drove was just fantastic.  Best road manners in a pickup, smooth ride, gtsy engine, and still all the truck capabilities.  At best this will be a very light selling niche vehicle.  

Nice that it fits 8x4's flat in the bed with the tail down.   Will be interesting to see the fuel economy ratings..

I just don't understand why anyone would buy of these. The GM twins, and hell, even the Tacoma, offer such good road manners, you'd have to be dumb to throw away their off-road ability and ruggedness for what will undoubtedly be vehicle that costs the same but is vastly inferior in so many ways.

 

I think Honda should have just left the Ridgeline name to history. Use the money to give as a new S2K.

I completely agree. The only thing I could think of is maybe in FWD form it gets pretty dang good mpg, for what it is. 

But yes, the other two,heck even the Nissan, all do the small truck thing so much better.

Nice that it fits 8x4's flat in the bed with the tail down.   Will be interesting to see the fuel economy ratings..

Agreed, super nice, especially when you have a load on (imagine if you will... MULCH), you have a flat tire, and realize the spare is accessed through a trapdoor located in the BED FLOOR.  Or how about when you're towing and you realize the tongue weight of the trailer is actually taking weight OFF the primary drive (AND STEERING) wheels?

FWD is simply stupid for anything purporting to be a "real" working truck.  And a Dodge Rampage/Plymouth Scamp at least had the decency to put the spare under the bed... not INSIDE it.

frogger, this is not meant to insult you, I just had to post my views on this useless contraption called Ridgeline.

Oh; it's FWD?? If I had bothered to think about it, that would be obvious, but who bothers to ponder the specs of a Honda truck?
This is the Dodge Rampage / VW Rabbit pickup experiment all over again, isn't it?

The '4x8 with tailgate down' thing is kind of a non-issue- you lay 4x8 stuff on the top edge of the closed tailgate; you don't drive with the gate down, slipping your load on the road at the first intersection. I only gots a 6.5-ft bed, never stops me. But you can't sell it as a 'full size bed…. with the tailgate down' ; that's ridiculous. 

I think it is good that it looks more like a pickup, the old Ridgeline looked awkward and not really a truck not really an SUV.   It should be a pretty strong competitor to the other mid-size pick ups, the Honda 3.5 V6 is smooth and reliable, it should have a car-like ride.  It isn't my sort of vehicle, but I think it will be more successful than the last Ridgeline.

It looks like a Pilot EXT.

I am no fan of this truck but I would pay attention to it.

This is the kind of vehicle that could start a new movment easy. The past model even with FWD and a crappy interior did well enought to continue here. This one is closer to where it needs to be.

There are many in rhe CUV maket that this truck appeals to and it does all they like with a litlte better MPG and they like it. It is more of a more useful UTE than than a truck and they are ok with it. This is not a VW pick up as this one will carrly larger items with more ease. It will carry the bulky items better than a CUV.

As for AWD GMC has offered it on the Denalu trucks as in full time AWD in the past and I think it is still offered but I would have to check.

To be honest this truck may do better for what it's not than what it is. This is the Anti truck and some like that.

​Also you have the blind Honda buying factor. I think Honda may do better than Nissan and Toyota would with a full size here.

​Now I would be affraid of the coming Hyundai truck. Styling alone will sell it as it is sharp looking I hate to say. Word is in the artical I read that it is a matter of when not if that it is built. That one if it has any real capacity it could make an impact on the future of trucks. It has that look GM played with in show trucks but just never had the nerve to pull off.

I am no fan of this truck but I would pay attention to it.

 

This is the kind of vehicle that could start a new movment easy. The past model even with FWD and a crappy interior did well enought to continue here. This one is closer to where it needs to be.

 

There are many in rhe CUV maket that this truck appeals to and it does all they like with a litlte better MPG and they like it. It is more of a more useful UTE than than a truck and they are ok with it. This is not a VW pick up as this one will carrly larger items with more ease. It will carry the bulky items better than a CUV.

 

As for AWD GMC has offered it on the Denalu trucks as in full time AWD in the past and I think it is still offered but I would have to check.

 

To be honest this truck may do better for what it's not than what it is. This is the Anti truck and some like that.

​Also you have the blind Honda buying factor. I think Honda may do better than Nissan and Toyota would with a full size here.

​Now I would be affraid of the coming Hyundai truck. Styling alone will sell it as it is sharp looking I hate to say. Word is in the artical I read that it is a matter of when not if that it is built. That one if it has any real capacity it could make an impact on the future of trucks. It has that look GM played with in show trucks but just never had the nerve to pull off.

Okay, I thought when I was reading one of the new Canyon reviews in the past few weeks that I read something like "active all wheel drive" or "full time all wheel drive" in one of the reviews but I couldn't find it later when I had time. I was confused. I thought it was 2WD or 4WD not an AWD-anything.

Anyway anybody could confirm yes or no to this?

 

I am no fan of this truck but I would pay attention to it.

 

This is the kind of vehicle that could start a new movment easy. The past model even with FWD and a crappy interior did well enought to continue here. This one is closer to where it needs to be.

 

There are many in rhe CUV maket that this truck appeals to and it does all they like with a litlte better MPG and they like it. It is more of a more useful UTE than than a truck and they are ok with it. This is not a VW pick up as this one will carrly larger items with more ease. It will carry the bulky items better than a CUV.

 

As for AWD GMC has offered it on the Denalu trucks as in full time AWD in the past and I think it is still offered but I would have to check.

 

To be honest this truck may do better for what it's not than what it is. This is the Anti truck and some like that.

​Also you have the blind Honda buying factor. I think Honda may do better than Nissan and Toyota would with a full size here.

​Now I would be affraid of the coming Hyundai truck. Styling alone will sell it as it is sharp looking I hate to say. Word is in the artical I read that it is a matter of when not if that it is built. That one if it has any real capacity it could make an impact on the future of trucks. It has that look GM played with in show trucks but just never had the nerve to pull off.

Okay, I thought when I was reading one of the new Canyon reviews in the past few weeks that I read something like "active all wheel drive" or "full time all wheel drive" in one of the reviews but I couldn't find it later when I had time. I was confused. I thought it was 2WD or 4WD not an AWD-anything.

 

Anyway anybody could confirm yes or no to this?

 

The Canyon is not AWD, it is 2WD or 4WD like most trucks. There is no difference in the Denali. 

The Denali trucks and full-size SUVs, and Escalade used to come with active full-time AWD, but they are now 2wd/4wd. 

The full size GMC Denali truck is offered in 1/2 as a AWD that is not available on the Chevy. Or at least that was the way it was. I drove one a couple years ago and it had the bigger engine and AWD standard along with a Power sun roof. But for $70K it should have had that.

The Canyon at this point is just regular shift on the fly 4 wheel drive. At least that is all I have seen and I did not see AWD on the Denali Canyon.

The Full size Serra is what I was referring too. To be honest GMC should make AWD standard on all Denali models but it is what it is.

The full size GMC Denali truck is offered in 1/2 as a AWD that is not available on the Chevy. Or at least that was the way it was. I drove one a couple years ago and it had the bigger engine and AWD standard along with a Power sun roof. But for $70K it should have had that.

The Canyon at this point is just regular shift on the fly 4 wheel drive. At least that is all I have seen and I did not see AWD on the Denali Canyon.

The Full size Serra is what I was referring too. To be honest GMC should make AWD standard on all Denali models but it is what it is.

I think there is a hit to capability if they do AWD instead of 4x4.  There is also a hit on fuel economy when running AWD all the time, disconnect the drive from the front wheels and get a MPG boost.  People in southern states don't need 4x4 like us northerners do, so no point in forcing it on them at additional cost.

 

 

I am no fan of this truck but I would pay attention to it.

 

This is the kind of vehicle that could start a new movment easy. The past model even with FWD and a crappy interior did well enought to continue here. This one is closer to where it needs to be.

 

There are many in rhe CUV maket that this truck appeals to and it does all they like with a litlte better MPG and they like it. It is more of a more useful UTE than than a truck and they are ok with it. This is not a VW pick up as this one will carrly larger items with more ease. It will carry the bulky items better than a CUV.

 

As for AWD GMC has offered it on the Denalu trucks as in full time AWD in the past and I think it is still offered but I would have to check.

 

To be honest this truck may do better for what it's not than what it is. This is the Anti truck and some like that.

​Also you have the blind Honda buying factor. I think Honda may do better than Nissan and Toyota would with a full size here.

​Now I would be affraid of the coming Hyundai truck. Styling alone will sell it as it is sharp looking I hate to say. Word is in the artical I read that it is a matter of when not if that it is built. That one if it has any real capacity it could make an impact on the future of trucks. It has that look GM played with in show trucks but just never had the nerve to pull off.

Okay, I thought when I was reading one of the new Canyon reviews in the past few weeks that I read something like "active all wheel drive" or "full time all wheel drive" in one of the reviews but I couldn't find it later when I had time. I was confused. I thought it was 2WD or 4WD not an AWD-anything.

 

Anyway anybody could confirm yes or no to this?

 

 

The Canyon is not AWD, it is 2WD or 4WD like most trucks. There is no difference in the Denali. 

 

The Denali trucks and full-size SUVs, and Escalade used to come with active full-time AWD, but they are now 2wd/4wd. 

 

See that makes sense but I could have sworn I read something about an AWD system. Ohhhhh well. Thanks! 

 

 

Okay, I thought when I was reading one of the new Canyon reviews in the past few weeks that I read something like "active all wheel drive" or "full time all wheel drive" in one of the reviews but I couldn't find it later when I had time. I was confused. I thought it was 2WD or 4WD not an AWD-anything.

 

 

 

Anyway anybody could confirm yes or no to this?

 

 

The Canyon is not AWD, it is 2WD or 4WD like most trucks. There is no difference in the Denali. 

 

The Denali trucks and full-size SUVs, and Escalade used to come with active full-time AWD, but they are now 2wd/4wd. 

 

See that makes sense but I could have sworn I read something about an AWD system. Ohhhhh well. Thanks! 

 

Okay, FOUND IT!

Well.. what I was talking about...

"Rear drive is standard, but our tester was equipped with the optional full-time four-wheel-drive system. "

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-gmc-canyon-duramax-diesel-4x4-first-test-review/

I guess when I read "full-time four-wheel-drive system." It made me think AWD. 

 

 

 

Okay, I thought when I was reading one of the new Canyon reviews in the past few weeks that I read something like "active all wheel drive" or "full time all wheel drive" in one of the reviews but I couldn't find it later when I had time. I was confused. I thought it was 2WD or 4WD not an AWD-anything.

 

 

 

Anyway anybody could confirm yes or no to this?

 

 

The Canyon is not AWD, it is 2WD or 4WD like most trucks. There is no difference in the Denali. 

 

The Denali trucks and full-size SUVs, and Escalade used to come with active full-time AWD, but they are now 2wd/4wd. 

 

See that makes sense but I could have sworn I read something about an AWD system. Ohhhhh well. Thanks! 

 

Okay, FOUND IT!

 

Well.. what I was talking about...

 

"Rear drive is standard, but our tester was equipped with the optional full-time four-wheel-drive system. "

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-gmc-canyon-duramax-diesel-4x4-first-test-review/

 

I guess when I read "full-time four-wheel-drive system." It made me think AWD. 

 

That is a mistake on MotorTrend's part.  It is not full time.

In this picture, look through the steering wheel on the lower left side.  That's the dial that lets you turn the truck to 2wd mode... thus, not "full-time".

 

 

The Canyon is not AWD, it is 2WD or 4WD like most trucks. There is no difference in the Denali. 

 

The Denali trucks and full-size SUVs, and Escalade used to come with active full-time AWD, but they are now 2wd/4wd. 

 

So the Escalade and Denali full-size SUVs are not AWD anymore!

FAILURE!!!  Sorry call me a snob, call me what you will but AWD is what is expected on Luxury SUV's and not a 4WD system with a Low Range. 

I now have to go test drive the new Escalade as I love my 2006 Escalade ESV Platinum and I love the new body and was excited to finally upgrade as I did not like the 3rd generation Escalade at all. But Cadillac does not indicate if it is an all the time 4WD system so in essence like AWD or if you only drive in 2WD till you are on rain or snow or off road. So does anyone know if the 4WD mode is like AWD 4HI working all the time or is this a RWD Bias that you have to put into 4WD?

AWD is what set Cadillac apart from Chevy and most GMC except the Denali. 

AWD is and should be standard on the Cadillac Escalade. This makes me think some old Fart from the old days is screwing up Cadillac again or did the new Cadillac leader screw this up?

If the new SRX has AWD, why not Escalade?

 

 

 

 

Okay, I thought when I was reading one of the new Canyon reviews in the past few weeks that I read something like "active all wheel drive" or "full time all wheel drive" in one of the reviews but I couldn't find it later when I had time. I was confused. I thought it was 2WD or 4WD not an AWD-anything.

 

 

 

Anyway anybody could confirm yes or no to this?

 

 

The Canyon is not AWD, it is 2WD or 4WD like most trucks. There is no difference in the Denali. 

 

The Denali trucks and full-size SUVs, and Escalade used to come with active full-time AWD, but they are now 2wd/4wd. 

 

See that makes sense but I could have sworn I read something about an AWD system. Ohhhhh well. Thanks! 

 

Okay, FOUND IT!

 

Well.. what I was talking about...

 

"Rear drive is standard, but our tester was equipped with the optional full-time four-wheel-drive system. "

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-gmc-canyon-duramax-diesel-4x4-first-test-review/

 

I guess when I read "full-time four-wheel-drive system." It made me think AWD. 

 

 

That is a mistake on MotorTrend's part.  It is not full time.

 

In this picture, look through the steering wheel on the lower left side.  That's the dial that lets you turn the truck to 2wd mode... thus, not "full-time".

 

Awesome, that's what I figured. It sounds really odd for a mid-size truck to be AWD to begin with. 

Thanks for the clarification, and I'm glad I found what "caught my eye" and got it cleared up. 

Oh yeah, Ridgeline.

Uhhh... Looks decent.. worse than the other 4 mid-sizers. FWD better return spectacular fuel economy. Buy a Tacoma or a Canyon Duramax. 

What is really the difference between a full time 4wd and AWD?  My 99 Z71 has a multimode 4wd hat includes 2WD, high, low, and full-time.  And in the fulltime mode it will transfer power between axles for traction.  03-04 Dakotas also offered a fulltime 4wd system with full-time, 4 high, and 4 low.  I am pretty sure the Canyon is available with a fulltime 4wd system as well.  it is one of the things I liked in the Canyon vs the Colorado.  It would still have a 2WD setting btw. 

The only thing really special is the torque vectoring in the Honda system and one has to think what ood is that gonna be on a truck?

What is really the difference between a full time 4wd and AWD?  My 99 Z71 has a multimode 4wd hat includes 2WD, high, low, and full-time.  And in the fulltime mode it will transfer power between axles for traction.  03-04 Dakotas also offered a fulltime 4wd system with full-time, 4 high, and 4 low.  I am pretty sure the Canyon is available with a fulltime 4wd system as well.  it is one of the things I liked in the Canyon vs the Colorado.  It would still have a 2WD setting btw. 

 

The only thing really special is the torque vectoring in the Honda system and one has to think what ood is that gonna be on a truck?

"Full time 4WD, also called permanent 4WD, (not to be confused with:part time 4WD ) is a system that powers all four wheels at all times and it can be used full time on all surfaces including pavement. The additional feature of a differential incorporated into the transfer case makes it possible to use 4WD all the time.

2WD is not available (only part time 4WD offers that option)"

 http://www.rubicon-trail.com/4WD101/difference_4WD_awd.html

The system the "auto" system that Chevy does, my Avalanche had it, leaves the front wheels on partially.   In Auto, I could drive it normally.  In 4Hi, the front wheels would bind up if I tried to take too tight of a turn. It was more of a "locked front end" when in 4Hi.

 

What is really the difference between a full time 4wd and AWD?  My 99 Z71 has a multimode 4wd hat includes 2WD, high, low, and full-time.  And in the fulltime mode it will transfer power between axles for traction.  03-04 Dakotas also offered a fulltime 4wd system with full-time, 4 high, and 4 low.  I am pretty sure the Canyon is available with a fulltime 4wd system as well.  it is one of the things I liked in the Canyon vs the Colorado.  It would still have a 2WD setting btw. 

 

The only thing really special is the torque vectoring in the Honda system and one has to think what ood is that gonna be on a truck?

 

"Full time 4WD, also called permanent 4WD, (not to be confused with:part time 4WD ) is a system that powers all four wheels at all times and it can be used full time on all surfaces including pavement. The additional feature of a differential incorporated into the transfer case makes it possible to use 4WD all the time.

2WD is not available (only part time 4WD offers that option)"

 

 http://www.rubicon-trail.com/4WD101/difference_4WD_awd.html

 

The system the "auto" system that Chevy does, my Avalanche had it, leaves the front wheels on partially.   In Auto, I could drive it normally.  In 4Hi, the front wheels would bind up if I tried to take too tight of a turn. It was more of a "locked front end" when in 4Hi.

 

Ya Rock!

That was a great link to explain the differences. Cadillac really needs to clarify the Full Time 4WD. 

AWD with a 4LO option is what it really is and that is great.

 

 

What is really the difference between a full time 4wd and AWD?  My 99 Z71 has a multimode 4wd hat includes 2WD, high, low, and full-time.  And in the fulltime mode it will transfer power between axles for traction.  03-04 Dakotas also offered a fulltime 4wd system with full-time, 4 high, and 4 low.  I am pretty sure the Canyon is available with a fulltime 4wd system as well.  it is one of the things I liked in the Canyon vs the Colorado.  It would still have a 2WD setting btw. 

 

The only thing really special is the torque vectoring in the Honda system and one has to think what ood is that gonna be on a truck?

 

"Full time 4WD, also called permanent 4WD, (not to be confused with:part time 4WD ) is a system that powers all four wheels at all times and it can be used full time on all surfaces including pavement. The additional feature of a differential incorporated into the transfer case makes it possible to use 4WD all the time.

2WD is not available (only part time 4WD offers that option)"

 

 http://www.rubicon-trail.com/4WD101/difference_4WD_awd.html

 

The system the "auto" system that Chevy does, my Avalanche had it, leaves the front wheels on partially.   In Auto, I could drive it normally.  In 4Hi, the front wheels would bind up if I tried to take too tight of a turn. It was more of a "locked front end" when in 4Hi.

 

 

Ya Rock!

 

That was a great link to explain the differences. Cadillac really needs to clarify the Full Time 4WD. 

 

AWD with a 4LO option is what it really is and that is great.

 

I think all of the GM products that have 4wd can be run in "auto 4wd" all the time. It hits you at the gas pump, but you can do it.  Most of the time, I ran my Avalanche in 2wd mode because there was no need for more than that.

Once upon a time all the SUVs were body on frame, rear drive 4x4.  Blazers, Explorers, etc.  Then the wave of front drive unibody crossovers took over.  I think Honda could win some people over.  This level truck isn't used for anything heavy duty.

Once upon a time all the SUVs were body on frame, rear drive 4x4.  Blazers, Explorers, etc.  Then the wave of front drive unibody crossovers took over.  I think Honda could win some people over.  This level truck isn't used for anything heavy duty.

That's exactly what this truck is for.... people who think they need an 4x4 Truck to bring home 10 bags of mulch from Lowes... 

(yet my '04 CRV handles at least 16)

I believe the AWD is not in all for some of the reasons you give but also the fact people are paying more for a Denali just for the extra plastic chrome. lighted rockers and wood trim on the wheel and not expecting a much more expensice drive system. Just look at the Terrain Denali vs. the SLT2. It is not worth the money when your really look at what all you get for the price difference. But yet is sells and makes a lot of money. Standard AWD would add to the cost and not really add an equal amount of money. 
 

I still wish the Denali was like an SS package with some real mechanical hardare on all model that make it special. Be it a larger or more powerful engine a better suspsnesion or the like to go with the trim. Denali on some models today are like what the SS became when it was added ot the old Malibu 10 years ago.

I understand but but it is a wish.

I believe the AWD is not in all for some of the reasons you give but also the fact people are paying more for a Denali just for the extra plastic chrome. lighted rockers and wood trim on the wheel and not expecting a much more expensice drive system. Just look at the Terrain Denali vs. the SLT2. It is not worth the money when your really look at what all you get for the price difference. But yet is sells and makes a lot of money. Standard AWD would add to the cost and not really add an equal amount of money. 

 

I still wish the Denali was like an SS package with some real mechanical hardare on all model that make it special. Be it a larger or more powerful engine a better suspsnesion or the like to go with the trim. Denali on some models today are like what the SS became when it was added ot the old Malibu 10 years ago.

 

I understand but but it is a wish.

I hear what you are saying and would agree with most of it. I believe there is a proper place for the Denali package as is today as most people just want a top of the line auto with trimmings. Then I believe there should be a Denali Syclone and Denali Typhoon packages. These would have everything plus the performance parts.

Denali Syclone would be on all trucks.

Denali Typhoon would be on all SUV/CUVs.

New Package would be:

Denali Hurricane package

This would be the hardened capabilities of the Hummer on any Truck or SUV/CUV. This would allow GMC to have the H4 to compete with the wrangler but also GMC would then have a Raptor competitor.

I would build a Raptor competitor but I would not go as far as trying to relive the past.

GMC has moved on and needs to create new legends not try to rehash a past that was cool but pails compared to today.

The AWD and extra power I see is not so much a performance package like the old Syclone. It is more a point of just giving more to the customer for the extra money. Case in point the standard 6.0 and AWD that has been offered on the Denali Sierra.

GMC does need a performance model or two but not on everything. The Denali name is enough. I own a Terrain and trust me it is not my desire for a performance model. I hauls well. Rides great and is comfortable. Luxury is more the point.

​Now to take a Sierra or Canyon and make a  Raptor competitor would be fine and I would love a Sport version of both trucks in 2 wheel drive too. Lowered suspension larger tires and a variety  of engine options. Much like the ZQ8. People could tailor the package to their wallet and taste. Many ZQ8 models were 4 cylinders even with the V6 option. I would love a 2.0 Turbo option in the Canyon. Offer It with a tune package that could easily see 300+ HP and 340 FT#.

But in no way can you rehash the Syclone much like the GN. It was what it was for the time and there are new ideas and opportunities that should be created.

The fact is when you have no ideas and no money living in the past is a quick, cheap and easy way out. GM does not have to live that way anymore.

Regardless of personal opinion, the hard fact remains that what is familiar has a leg up in marketing.

Look, for example, at the candy industry. The popular, volume names have been around forever. Reese's Pieces is a newcomer, and it's 37 years old.

Challenger, Mustang, Camaro, Stingray, Ferrari, Lambo (basically building the same silhouette since 1973) wouldn't be all doing excellent if they didn't speak to potential buyers on both a product AND image basis. Look at what "Hemi" has done for Chrysler.

The bottom of "NEW!!" is structurally unsound. Auto design as at it's 95th percentile of development right now (it's also why you see the degree of retro we've seen in the last 15-20 years. No major automotive OEMs EVER did 'retro' before the 2000s. The well is nearly dry). Marketing is right there with it (witness the madness of nothingness of alphanumerics, pretty much decoupled from the 'code' it was brought out under). 

If the product can be well engineered & designed, speak to a targeted segment that will buy at levels to reasonably support a ROI, going with heritage marketing can be the one thing that pushes ROI over into the black. IMO, were Buick to bring out a dedicated, slinky performance coupe with 'high image', and the market folk had it boiled down to "ARX66" and "Grand National", there's one choice that's unquestionably smarter than the other, from a business perspective.

I would build a Raptor competitor but I would not go as far as trying to relive the past.

 

GMC has moved on and needs to create new legends not try to rehash a past that was cool but pails compared to today.

 

The AWD and extra power I see is not so much a performance package like the old Syclone. It is more a point of just giving more to the customer for the extra money. Case in point the standard 6.0 and AWD that has been offered on the Denali Sierra.

 

GMC does need a performance model or two but not on everything. The Denali name is enough. I own a Terrain and trust me it is not my desire for a performance model. I hauls well. Rides great and is comfortable. Luxury is more the point.

​Now to take a Sierra or Canyon and make a  Raptor competitor would be fine and I would love a Sport version of both trucks in 2 wheel drive too. Lowered suspension larger tires and a variety  of engine options. Much like the ZQ8. People could tailor the package to their wallet and taste. Many ZQ8 models were 4 cylinders even with the V6 option. I would love a 2.0 Turbo option in the Canyon. Offer It with a tune package that could easily see 300+ HP and 340 FT#.

 

But in no way can you rehash the Syclone much like the GN. It was what it was for the time and there are new ideas and opportunities that should be created.

 

The fact is when you have no ideas and no money living in the past is a quick, cheap and easy way out. GM does not have to live that way anymore.

Usually I can agree with the majority of your thinking, but this time I have to disagree. The Syclone and Typhoon have performance heritage that is not tarnished and you could use the names on 21st century  modern versions. Maybe these would have AWD with an Electric boost system that we have seen in other auto's. I believe you are right that not all legacy names should be reused, but some sure could be used over again on a 21st century version auto.

 

I would build a Raptor competitor but I would not go as far as trying to relive the past.

 

GMC has moved on and needs to create new legends not try to rehash a past that was cool but pails compared to today.

 

The AWD and extra power I see is not so much a performance package like the old Syclone. It is more a point of just giving more to the customer for the extra money. Case in point the standard 6.0 and AWD that has been offered on the Denali Sierra.

 

GMC does need a performance model or two but not on everything. The Denali name is enough. I own a Terrain and trust me it is not my desire for a performance model. I hauls well. Rides great and is comfortable. Luxury is more the point.

​Now to take a Sierra or Canyon and make a  Raptor competitor would be fine and I would love a Sport version of both trucks in 2 wheel drive too. Lowered suspension larger tires and a variety  of engine options. Much like the ZQ8. People could tailor the package to their wallet and taste. Many ZQ8 models were 4 cylinders even with the V6 option. I would love a 2.0 Turbo option in the Canyon. Offer It with a tune package that could easily see 300+ HP and 340 FT#.

 

But in no way can you rehash the Syclone much like the GN. It was what it was for the time and there are new ideas and opportunities that should be created.

 

The fact is when you have no ideas and no money living in the past is a quick, cheap and easy way out. GM does not have to live that way anymore.

 

Usually I can agree with the majority of your thinking, but this time I have to disagree. The Syclone and Typhoon have performance heritage that is not tarnished and you could use the names on 21st century  modern versions. Maybe these would have AWD with an Electric boost system that we have seen in other auto's. I believe you are right that not all legacy names should be reused, but some sure could be used over again on a 21st century version auto.

 

The Syclone was a limited model that was cool but never made a ton of impact long term. The Typhoon is all but forgotten by most including some enthusiast..

To do both today they both would be very costly and the more content would reduce the profitability.

On the other hand a sport model would give some flexibility to let people built what they want. Also I do see a place for a Raptor competitor if it could be done for the right price. No $70K models here Ford has kept the price down so GM would have to do the same.

​The sales of any performance model will be limited so you have to do it right and smart.

As for reusing names there are times and places they work but too often they are the cheap and easy way out. Also many times they are used to fix products that were not right to start with.

​GM tried to wait and use the GTO name on the right model after using it on two FWD based show cars. That was the right thing to do but even when they did use it in the hail mary before the bail out trying to save Pontiac.

​I think Lutz knew it was too later but was willing to risk it all in a remote chance they could pull it off. 

The Stingray name was fine for the Vette. But while many say they should use the Grand National name or GNX again that is wrong. There is not much relation to a present day car to what the GN really was. Even the meaning behind the GN is no longer viable. It is one that needs left to the ages.

Also for Buick they need to move on as if they want people to think they are no the same Buick of the past then stop using the old names. I was pleased the new cars are showing up sans portholes. If you want to be seen as different then be different.

Chevy should move on from repeating the LT engine names. This just adds confusion. These new engines are good enough for their own names.

The time right now is key for GM to convince they are not the same old GM. They have the best product they have had in decades. So in some key areas I would carry over some names that have not been damaged like Silverado and Malibu or Camaro. But in other areas like Buick I would rename them all. So few people care about the old names as it is the time is right to move on.

I really would rather see GMC get more Hummer like and in place of doing a Trax rehash lets revisit the Hummer Jeep concept. Make something more like a Renegade but cooler and less of a box on wheels. In other words butch it up a little.

But in the end luxury sells much better than Performance in the SUV segment anymore. Same for the SUV segment. Unless you get real expensive. Now do a car/SUV like the Porsche the performance there or Audi appears a little more in line but the it gets expensive again and more of a Cadillac priced thing.

The Avista is not a Grand National successor.  It is more rightly a Wildcat.  Authoritative, sporty grand tourer... not a quarter mile good ol' boy two dimensional situation with this car.

This RL is a worthy successor to previous, which of course is not saying a whole lot. Perfect for Honda customers.  I bet sales will double.  Which is also not saying a lot.  But double is better than zero, so worth the effort.

The Avista is not a Grand National successor.  It is more rightly a Wildcat.  Authoritative, sporty grand tourer... not a quarter mile good ol' boy two dimensional situation with this car.

I never said it was a GT successor.

​But yet many on the web cry to name it that?

It is not even a wildcat as it was a large boat and not known for grand touring.

You want to convince Buick is not your grandfathers car then don't name the damn thing after your grandfathers car.

Granted I am not keen on Alvista but god please save us from repeating the past to those who are looking for a future. The truth is Buick has never really made a car like the Alvista. The closest they have come is the 63-65 Riv and it was not a true Euro like GT like the Alvista is trying to be.

​Then the Riv went the wrong direction if it wanted to be a GT and only got bigger and heavier.

Yeah, Buick never really had a coupe like this in the past. 

Well it's an interesting truck, because Hyundai has confirmed it will build a Santa Cruz truck, which will be a competitor to this, and it will also be FWD based.

There is segment that is looking for a compelling small(er) truck. It's evident as this is hoe the Tacoma has remained in production and how the GM twins has lit it up.

This kind of vehicle is refreshing in its honesty. It's a lifestyle truck. Most truck buyers need nothing more than this. The interior is a carbon copy of the Pilot, so it should be the best in the midsize class.

Putting the spare under in a bunker under the bed is just a headscratcher at best and stupid at worst though. 

 

The Avista is not a Grand National successor.  It is more rightly a Wildcat.  Authoritative, sporty grand tourer... not a quarter mile good ol' boy two dimensional situation with this car.

 

I never said it was a GT successor.

​But yet many on the web cry to name it that?

 

It is not even a wildcat as it was a large boat and not known for grand touring.

 

You want to convince Buick is not your grandfathers car then don't name the damn thing after your grandfathers car.

 

Granted I am not keen on Alvista but god please save us from repeating the past to those who are looking for a future. The truth is Buick has never really made a car like the Alvista. The closest they have come is the 63-65 Riv and it was not a true Euro like GT like the Alvista is trying to be.

​Then the Riv went the wrong direction if it wanted to be a GT and only got bigger and heavier.

 

I can see it now:  "Buick ALvista Bundy Special Edition".  SUHWEET.

 

 

The Avista is not a Grand National successor.  It is more rightly a Wildcat.  Authoritative, sporty grand tourer... not a quarter mile good ol' boy two dimensional situation with this car.

 

I never said it was a GT successor.

​But yet many on the web cry to name it that?

 

It is not even a wildcat as it was a large boat and not known for grand touring.

 

You want to convince Buick is not your grandfathers car then don't name the damn thing after your grandfathers car.

 

Granted I am not keen on Alvista but god please save us from repeating the past to those who are looking for a future. The truth is Buick has never really made a car like the Alvista. The closest they have come is the 63-65 Riv and it was not a true Euro like GT like the Alvista is trying to be.

​Then the Riv went the wrong direction if it wanted to be a GT and only got bigger and heavier.

 

I can see it now:  "Buick ALvista Bundy Special Edition".  SUHWEET.

 

Ok?????

dude really?

Not to draw out the far more interesting Buick discussion in a dull Honduh thread, but the Avista is very much so in the '63-65 Riviera position, a very distinctive, powerful upscale 'image' coupe. Wildcat was a trim variant on the full-size models but the Riv was completely unique. They are completely comparable.

dude really?

You missed the sarcasm in the last couple question marks!

Not to draw out the far more interesting Buick discussion in a dull Honduh thread, but the Avista is very much so in the '63-65 Riviera position, a very distinctive, powerful upscale 'image' coupe. Wildcat was a trim variant on the full-size models but the Riv was completely unique. They are completely comparable.

 

That is just sex on wheels.