Does Mark Reuss Think Large Cars Have a Future? “Absolutely”

The best regarded Rivs were 63-65 and 71-73 Some of the FWD were nice but they never could capture the look of the 63-65 Silver Arrows styling.

The 1963 impressed the best designers in the world and I would love to see a little of that herritage placed in a modern car. I do not want it to be retro but I would like to see some hall marks of this on a RWD coupe.

It also should be RWD as it would better fit the price class it will be in for todays market. FWD becomes a hard sell the closer to $40K you get. Over $40K there are too many good RWD cars to choose from and little interest in FWD coupes.

Take an updated Camaro Zeta platform in Zeta II updates and make it a Riv and take a LWB Zeta II and make it a 225 Electra or Park Ave

You'd be surprised how loved the 79 - 85 and 93 - 99 Rivs are. They aren't loved by (most) car guys, but every time someone wants to talk to me about my Toronado, they inevitably have an Aunt/Mother/Cousin/Sister/Grandmother who had a Riviera about the same year and "just loved that car". Yes, they were women's cars by that body... but women hold over 50% of the car market today, so that might not be a bad thing.

I agree OIds, the Riv and woman will do wonders for GM.

Problem is, the new Riv will likely be a RWD modern version of the '86-'89 Riv.

Problem is, the new Riv will likely be a RWD modern version of the '86-'89 Riv.

Are you sure it will be that small?! I am thinking at least the '95-'99, if not the '79-85 Riv (RWD of course).

There were Rivieras before the sixties...

They were trim lines... or body styles.

I know, just being the devil's advocate.

The best regarded Rivs were 63-65 and 71-73 Some of the FWD were nice but they never could capture the look of the 63-65 Silver Arrows styling.

The 1963 impressed the best designers in the world and I would love to see a little of that herritage placed in a modern car. I do not want it to be retro but I would like to see some hall marks of this on a RWD coupe.

It also should be RWD as it would better fit the price class it will be in for todays market. FWD becomes a hard sell the closer to $40K you get. Over $40K there are too many good RWD cars to choose from and little interest in FWD coupes.

Take an updated Camaro Zeta platform in Zeta II updates and make it a Riv and take a LWB Zeta II and make it a 225 Electra or Park Ave

I have to agree here, the '63-'65 and '71-'73 Rivieras were styling high water marks for Buick.

They are two of the handful of Buicks I would ever want to own.

You'd be surprised how loved the 79 - 85 and 93 - 99 Rivs are. They aren't loved by (most) car guys, but every time someone wants to talk to me about my Toronado, they inevitably have an Aunt/Mother/Cousin/Sister/Grandmother who had a Riviera about the same year and "just loved that car". Yes, they were women's cars by that body... but women hold over 50% of the car market today, so that might not be a bad thing.

Lets face it how many people are working on or saving any of these Rivs. While they were not bad they were just the best of the era. In the big picture they will never be remembered as well as the 63-65. The 63 was made a milestone car years ago by the Antique Auto Alub of America. This is not a title they share often.

Like I said I would not want to get too retro here. I just would like to see a ground breaking design on par with the 63-65. Many of these older Rivs would not translate to todays aero requirements as well.

Stop thinking like a "car guy" for the moment and look at the bigger market picture. To 95% of the market, say the name "Riviera" and the car they think of is more likely to be related to my car or the 93-99 model than anything from the 60's. This isn't a value judgment of either car just a truth of the market. At the same time the name is one of the most positive thought of nameplates in the Buick stable. Put these two things together and you have a lot of positive feelings out there about 2 of the 3 final generations of Riviera.

A non-car guy under the age of 60 isn't going to know a 60's Riviera from a Rambler, but they *will* recognize my era one.

^ I agree totally that the Riviera name is one of the image highlights from Buick's history. Except for the corporate-forced '86 gen, there wasn't a real turkey in the paddock.

However, I haven't seen more than 3 '79-85 E-bodies in 1 year in over a decade- I believe they have passed from general consciousness. Maybe in other areas of the country it's a different story.

Not that they should be forgotten- they were excellent designs (I love the Eldos & the Rivs), just my observation.

I know I move in vintage circles, but I've seen references to the '63-65s outside of car circles. Both are excellent designs, but only one says 'classic' IMO.

I would vote a toss up WRT the '63-65 or the '79-85 AFA which comes to mind more often for the general schmo. A poll (not here of course) would be interesting...

I'm just going from personal experience on this one. Gassing up my Toronado always takes 10 minutes longer than it should because someone wants to chat about it....and often there once was a similar vintage Riviera in the family that is remembered fondly.

Rivs are also the most common of this generation Ebody to show up at cruises. Eldogs never show.

It may have passed from general consciousness, but remind people of the name and they will most likely think of the 2 generations I'm talking about.

I would say it depends on who you ask, but then I hate the E-body cars so I guess my opinion is a bit biased.

^ no love here ??

The '66-70 (specifically the '66-67) generation seems to be overshadowed by their predecessors and their E-body siblings...the '66-67 was quite a beautiful design.

^ no love here ??

Nice enough, but very Olds-like. The 63-65 and 71-73 are completely unique styles where this just a bit less.

Stop thinking like a "car guy" for the moment and look at the bigger market picture. To 95% of the market, say the name "Riviera" and the car they think of is more likely to be related to my car or the 93-99 model than anything from the 60's. This isn't a value judgment of either car just a truth of the market. At the same time the name is one of the most positive thought of nameplates in the Buick stable. Put these two things together and you have a lot of positive feelings out there about 2 of the 3 final generations of Riviera.

A non-car guy under the age of 60 isn't going to know a 60's Riviera from a Rambler, but they *will* recognize my era one.

This is a time where like Lutz you need to think like a car guy. You play your best card and tat is what you do not just what people remember or might remember.

Now keep in mind when I say use some highlights fromt he 63-65 I do not mean go full hog on retro here. To be honest GM needs to better than go retro here. I would like to see them use some highlights of the car or a full on modern with a little pontoon fender look.

To be honest there are none of the past Rivs that would generate very good direct modern aero package.

This car could use a little from several gens. The photo Camino posted and I have posted in the past of the small Buick from the GM lab uses a fender that represents the 63-65 and the rear roof line from a 71-73.

The key here is to make a original car with only highlights from the past.

While the 79-85 may have been popular then means little today in the big picture. As for people talking to you about the Olds. I get the same thing with my HHR SS and Fiero. Does that mean everyone wants one of those too? The fact is these are cars that look different and while they stand out that does not always translate into sales.

The bottom line of what Buick needs to do is a great car with mostly original styling with only hints of the past. This should not be a car like a 5th gen Camaro where it points to one year. The car needs to look like a Buick and it needs good styling that identifies that but can stand on it's own. That is what help set the Riv appart. It did not follow trends it made them.

So keep in mind when I say 63-65 I do not want to see a 2015 version of a 63-65 but I would like to see styling that makes that kind of statment or just juse a little of the styling say like from the front fender.

To me the 63 set the standard for styling trend world wide. Many of the worlds best designers praised it in Europe and that is what I would like to see. There is always a risk in doing this but I think the GM staff is strong enough to do it again. The Lab car has enough old Buick in it to let you know it is a Buick but it is it's own design.

^ no love here ??

Nice car but would not traslate well onto a modern car. This styling needs a larger and I mean larger car and the aero of today would mute the best parts of this design. Also the fact they would not do hide away head lights today since they are heave had harder to keep in alingment today.

The one thing I do fear is a wide waste line on a new Riv. Most of these cars had a thin coke bottle waste line. Today for crash standards the sides of the cars just get wider and wider. That would hurt a longer car that needs to flow like this one.

You'd be surprised how loved the 79 - 85 and 93 - 99 Rivs are. They aren't loved by (most) car guys, but every time someone wants to talk to me about my Toronado, they inevitably have an Aunt/Mother/Cousin/Sister/Grandmother who had a Riviera about the same year and "just loved that car". Yes, they were women's cars by that body... but women hold over 50% of the car market today, so that might not be a bad thing.

See? lol!

Problem is, there is so very little unique modern design that making 'the next classic' is nigh unto impossible.

The only things distinctive on the road today are in fact those that aren't afraid to utilize classic, dynamic proportion & line.

Those that do are Camaro, Challenger & Mustang.

The problem today is what I feel very good designers anymore with new original ideas. The stylist of today just put little emotion in their designs.

To be the retro thing is a cop out to play with your emotions like the memory or a old girlfriend who was perfect 30 years ago in your mind.

There are still some designs that do come through like the Bently Coupe and the Ferrari Italia. These cars are not only good looking but you kind of feel the design inside.

Add to the lack of original thought today you also have to factor in other things to be fair. Many designers are restricted by managment that would like style a car by committee. You also have the companies who put aero above styling but to be fair even a well styled car can be made aero efficent as Ferrari has proven that with several of thier models.

Today the lack of thought has created many cars with the same hallmarks. How many cars today have fender vents because someone else did it? How many companys have copied other cars with good or poor results. Even the new Ford Fusion has a Aston look to it.

I also see where cars have to be practical to build and durable for the long term. I see this in my HHR. While it has a different body style that sets it appart it also suffers from issues with the design. If you do not have running boards the rear fender will be sand blasted in 2 years. The stone chips and bugs do not just hit the front of the car but the sides and top of the nose of the car. Some owners have come out and found where someone sits on the fender denting the hell out of it as the HHR fender is so thin compared to the fenders of old.

Finally companies are often reluctant to take that risk on advanced different styling. They are affraid some designs can be polarizing and if the car fails it will cost a lot of money to fix and someones future. This leaves us with many playing it safe. The HHR is a good example of taking a risk on a polar design. In this case it paid off but with many other love it or hate it designs like the Cube only the sales in Japan saved it.

There is no reason modern classics can not be achieved today if companies are willing to take the risk. Dynamic Proportions and lines can still be created if someone at GM or any other company is willing to step up.

The sad fact is the best we see is only when they take the safe way out with the retro stuff that is getting a little long in the tooth now. We need designers that have more an eye for lines vs the Jetsons.

Saying retro is a 'cop out' fails to see beyond faint strains of familiarity to what is timeless beauty.

Line, flow, proportion & detail is art, not retro.

It's like looking at a picture of Rita Hayworth from 1941 today, and saying, 'we don't want to go there because we've been there'.

Nonsense. Beauty is eternal, and achieving it in design should be a constant.

Instead we get shapeless lumps with no detail & derivative cues, like the Bentley coupe, and try to self-affirm the concept of 'progress' by calling it 'gorgeous'.

While you may be ok witth A Da Vinci on black velvet or an Elvis Impersonator some of us expect companies to make better attempts to create new classics and not just spew out modern interpitations of a pass creation.

Retro and historic cues are ok but don't abuse them. If you put the blinders on we will never discover the next great master piece. We always need to appreciate the past but we still need to strive to the future with new ideas. My issue with this is I do not see enough work or risk on creating a new classic. Companies are not pushing the envolpe like the likes of Earl and Mitchell as design just does not have the power it once held in most companies. Today they are just a department while in the past many people could name Earl but could not name who the President of GM was.

Rita was great in her day but she had her time. We do not want to go there because we have already been there.

We always need to remember and embrace our past but we need to continue to move forward and create new classics. Many hot rodders have created some nice cars based on todays cars using things MFG would never risk. Boyd/Foose, Steve Moal and others have shown oiginal design is still alive but most MFG's are not willing to take the chance.

Unfortunately, we haven't seen a so-called "new classic" in a good 30 years, and with ever-tighening restrictions on design WRT CAFE, .cd, packaging, and the push to smaller & smaller vehicles, I don't expect to.

A given brand used to be visually distinctive, apart from everyone else, esp the luxury brands. No more.

Now the average driver, if they even care, struggles to ID a mercedees from a toyota out on the road.

Brands like BMW vainly cling to outdated front-end designs just to have a whisker of distinction- unable to ever break free and offer anything new/fresh.

Size, trim, language are all compressed into tighter & tighter boxes.

Homogenization is the guiding hand, not expression.

There is no room nor allowance to 'take chances' anymore.

...all of which sucks to the nth degree.

Unfortunately, we haven't seen a so-called "new classic" in a good 30 years, and with ever-tighening restrictions on design WRT CAFE, .cd, packaging, and the push to smaller & smaller vehicles, I don't expect to.

A given brand used to be visually distinctive, apart from everyone else, esp the luxury brands. No more.

Now the average driver, if they even care, struggles to ID a mercedees from a toyota out on the road.

Brands like BMW vainly cling to outdated front-end designs just to have a whisker of distinction- unable to ever break free and offer anything new/fresh.

Size, trim, language are all compressed into tighter & tighter boxes.

Homogenization is the guiding hand, not expression.

There is no room nor allowance to 'take chances' anymore.

I fully agree that the box is getting smaller and smaller to work in but there is no excuse for poor design anything this side of a car the size of a Sonic. Note there is no hope for the Spark size.

The lack of risk and creativity is one of the major issues. Also the reality of the real world keep many cars from using some styling that just will not hold up long term.

I think that GM has shown what they can do with the Impala. They have taken it from a dumpy little odd tail lighted car to the next gen that is what I would term stunning for a car today.

While taste may differ there are still many cars today that display some nice lines.

The only point I do disagree with is that a great looking car can not be created today with the lack of retro styling. I think The Cadillac Sixteen showed that and I fully expect that the new CTS and Flagship will reflect this same kind of thinking.

While even the Ciel is not my cup of tea it was well recieved by many and shows the risk I feel a now refinaced Cadillac will take a chance on.

We need to remember we really have not seen much of the new designs post Chapter 11 yet as cars like the XTC, Impala and Malibu were all pre Chapter 11 designs. While some details may have changed for the most these cars were shown to the press pre chapter 11 so we know that they were well along before the money arrived.

By the way I removed the neg that someone posted. You should not be hit for just saying what you feel.

Sixteen was not the greatest design, but it was helped as far as it did reach due to having some length to work with.

Current CTS is a very nice, striking design, but it's angularity works with a smaller template.

Ciel has numerous heritage-feel cues, but again is helped by being a decent-sized canvas to start with. Has a ton of fluidity the s-class for example, sorely lacks.

I hope the Cadillac Omega follows the Ciel rather than the Sixteen in language.

Next Impala is no stunner IMO, just run of the mill, but I don't expect leading edge design from Chevy.

Small cars can have striking design, but productionizing brings it all back to the muddy pond of mediocrity.

I didn't mean to imply retro cues are the only way to create a so-called 'new classic', but it has been the only way recently we've seen designs that have a distinct appearance.

There are more obstacles to design today than at any other time in history, IMO. 'Progress' has been slower these last 20 years than any other 20-yr span, too.

What do you think of the ATS?

LOT of people seem to believe it's not radical enough. I don't necc. agree it needs to be.

IMO, it's a nice stylistic addition to Cadillac, I 'like' it, but would have to see it in person to know if I need to modify that opinion either way.

I really do like the current CTS, it still turns my head.

Cadillac is a complex walnut for me- I've long been a fan (Cadillacs are what first pulled me into being a car enthusiast).

I love so much of the marque's heritage... I think I give Cadillac more slack than perhaps I should WRT the current stuff.

I don't know if I can 'trust' my own opinion here.........

The one thing we need to keep in mind here is styling is subjective. While the Current CTS appeal to you and I it is still a turn off for many,

Also I and many others love the Sixteen. But even with a shorter hood it wouild still be fine in my veiw.

As for the Impala I love it and I think the market will scoope them up in great numbers.

But the market loves many of the Hyundai models and to me I just never connected there. I will admit they are more stylish than a Honda and Toyota but I just was never inot that type of styling.

The Mrket is diverse today and a lot of people have a lot of different expectations. For better or worse I guess that is ok as it cuts a company slack if they miss on the styling. It seams like someone ends up buying no matter how good or bad. The Aztek proved that.

For the most people want to stand out and be seen in a vehicle that has some appeal. Their wants and likes have changed too. As while many are not car enthusiast the retro look is lost on many of them too. I see that with my HHR. as half love it half hate it. The one odd thing is the SS styling, There is hardly a gas stop that I do not get told they love what I did to my SS. THen when I tell them I bought it that way I get the look of Chevy did that? Most really are not HHR fans but they are drawn to the SS because it is different. THen the shock comes in when they find the SS is more then body work and badges. The next question is Chevy makes that and then I tell them not anymore.

I find it amazing what people want today in a vehicle.

I used to find it odd with my 04 GTP on how many people came up and told me how much they liked it. The styling was ok but far from what I would call stunning. We did have the 5 spoke wheel options and that did fit the car better than the 10 spoke GTP wheels. I guess you just ever be sure what people will embrace today..

I don't believe the market loves Hyundai styling. I believe it loves the perceived value package.

I will admit that I am now a member of the '13 Ford Taurus fan club. I can't say for sure I won't be tempted to price one out, but the new Impala can't come out fast enough for me (maybe I should go spend some time in a LaCrosse)

Needless to say, if GM/Chevrolet sold civilian versions of the Caprice here in the US, I would likely give it some serious thought (the current Impala is a joke to me - no offense to any owners - when compared to the new Taurus). Though the PPV Caprice is not as up-to-date as the Taurus, I do like it's design and would give it a shot.

The taurus is a shockingly awful car to drive.

Instant turnoff.

The front end refresh doesn't improve the Taurus, IMO.

Taurus is butt ugly compared to the PPV Caprice. Yet I feel the caprice could use a good dose of modernization.

Due to everyone wanting to fit in like lemmings, I can understand the asian thing of the Hyundai but for the rest of the world while better than what Toyota or Honda has to offer, it is still a bit blaw to me.

I don't believe the market loves Hyundai styling. I believe it loves the perceived value package.

The value and warranty are big parts, but I think a lot of people do like the Elantra and Sonata look. Especially after decades of boring looking Civivs, Camrys and Accords. The Azera continues the fluidic sculpture, if that sells well, I'd say the market is liking the styling. Although I'd say Kia's styling is a main reason they have seen growth, while Hyundai I think the value equation is the primary.

I agree Hyundai is a package. Precieved Value and Precieved Quality are two parts. The third part is styling. Lets face it most Hyundai owners are people who have been buying Toyota and Honda and do not want to consider an American car. They see the Hyundai line and while to us here the styling is oh hum to a Accord owner it is like a Da Vinci.

Thank God many are now giving the American cars a chance now and we are seeing more migration back but they will have to work to keep them with quality and price as these people are not blind loyal to GM and will be unforgiving if they feel slighted.

The fact is most Asian car styling sucks and the Hyundai offers there most stylish they have. God know the new Camry and Accord have entered the Aztek Zone.

As for the Taurus I was never a fan. It was a step up from the 500 but that is not saying much. I also note the interior feels so cramped in the front seat. The console makes you feel crowded as does the dash.

The Fusion if priced right will do great and will rob many Taurus sales.

GM will hit Ford in the gut with the new RWD Chevy if they move to a full line up. Ford really has nothing planned to counter it.

Hyundai I think has a more youthful look too, especially on the Elantra and Veloster. To me a car like the Cruze looks like something older people would drive, it looks bland and boring. As do the Civic and Corolla. So to Gen X and Gen Y, I think Hyundai is on to something. They must be, Nissan stopped production on the Altima to regroup when the 2011 Sonata came out, the Sonta raised the bar.

I think the Caprice looks boring too, it has the same problems the G8 had. The 2013 Fusion is stunning looking, GM is in trouble in the mid-size segment. RWD could give them an edge in full size, but the 300C and Charger have that covered and look better than any GM full size sedan. And I am not a Chrysler/Dodge fan. The 2013 Impala looks okay from some angles, but looks like a Hyundai or VW from others. If the Impala goes up in price and loses the fleet business it will be interesting to see how it sells against the Azera and 300/Charger.

Give me the crack that makes you think Hyundai's FWD frump and its RWD Lexus mimicking bland look youthful.

Give me the crack that makes you think Hyundai's FWD frump and its RWD Lexus mimicking bland look youthful.

Lexus cars are either ugly or bland. Mostly moving from bland and boring of the early 2000s to just plain ugly now.

The Elantra and Veloster look more youthful than just about any other small cars. Sonata looks classy for a mid-sizer. I like what they are doing. I like the Focus and Fusion also. I think those 2 brands are doing the best right now in the small and mid-size classes.

lexus cars are in aesthetic lockstep with MB & BMW. Of course, BMWs & mercedees's are generally bland & non-distinct, too, so we would agree there.

veloster is from the 'weird insect' school of car design, and while 12-yr olds may find it 'cool', in general hyundai's overwraught styling is going to age incredibly quick.

Which must be why all hyundai dealers push the financing & cash back deals instead of the actual product.

A 25 year-old coworker of mine recently purchased a used 2011 Kia Forte sedan. She went window shopping and fell in love with the Kia Forte and Hyundai Elentra cars. She was driving a 2005 Dodge Neon that tarnished her view of domestic cars, not counting the fact many of our other coworkers are Asian car humpers that also told her to stay away from American cars. I showed her pictures of the Ford Fiesta and Chevy Cruze (again, looking at 1 year-old used cars), but she said she had it with domestics and all her friends have been way happy with their foreign cars. My step-son loves certain Kias and Scions, and my wife went out to lunch in a coworker's '11 or '12 Kia Optima and said how nice of a car it is too. Kia & Hyundai have upped the ante in the American marketplace and are growing on consumers minds very quickly.

Back on the large car topic, I wasn't overly impressed with the 2014 Chevy Impala when I saw it at the NYIAS in April. However, truth be told I wasn't into the '13 Ford Taurus either at the time (my recent rental experience changed my mind). I will say that while the new Impala has a nice look to it, I still like the current Holden Caprice (Chevy Caprice PPV) better. I will admit that I am a fan of the Cadillac XTS, and the wife is a big fan of the current Buick LaCrosse.

Here are some of my pics of the '14 Impala from the NYIAS:

Great pics, Not digging that interior in yellow on black. Kinda like a poopy baby diaper.

Great pics, Not digging that interior in yellow on black. Kinda like a poopy baby diaper.

The yellow pads look like they were just randomly tossed on the dash..very cheesy looking. I don't care for the dash design at all, but the exterior is clean.

No matter what we like here Kia and Hyundai are a growing force that even Honda and Toyota have shown fear to. They are giving more stylish cars with ok quailty at a cheaper price. That is what Chevy needs to do with better quality and they are working toward that.

The issue Chevy has is the problem with precieved quality. Chevy can put out a better car and for the most does but many people will reject it because the precieve it and not as good as the other. This trust needs to be re earned with time and better cars. you can't buy this and you can't market it as this is something the people have to find for themselves. Great of better styling is the frosting that helps sell the cake and GM is now using this to get people to give them a chance.

Why most have forgotten how bad Hyundai was in the past they are willing accept the good quality now for a lower payment. THey have used styling to draw attention to their line.

Odd cars like the Soul and Veloster are not styling stand outs but many people just flock to them because they are different. While may want to credit retro for the HHR and PT just being different also played a major roll.

The key in being different is not to play it too far like the Aztek. Different cute sells like in the mini and other cars. Different ugly is a hard sell no matter what.