GM News: General Motors Considering Selling Rebranded Peugeot Vans In U.S.

[William Maley]

William Maley

Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

July 11, 2013

A new report from Reuters cites France's La Tribune story that General Motors is in talks with PSA Peugeot-Citroën about possibly selling vans in the United States. The report doesn't say which vans are in consideration, only saying that van would be sold under ofne of GM's brand, most likely Chevrolet.

This news doesn't come as a surprise. GM currently has some of the oldest full-size vans on the marketplace and with fresh models coming in from Europe, GM could use all the help they can get. Also, GM recently struck a deal with Nissan to sell the NV200 as the Chevrolet City Express.

Source: Reuters

William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at [email protected] or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

View full article

[Drew Dowdell]

Well the Peugeot Boxer is the same as the Fiat Ducato... or the Ram Promaster to us Yanks, and the smaller vans are all related to Opels or other Fiats (or both)

Why couldn't GM just use Opel?

[NINETY EIGHT REGENCY]

Most likely Chevrolet would sell these vans and GMC too. Let's look at these commercial vans they sell at Peugeot- Citroen.


The Peugeot Boxer:


http://www.peugeot.com/en/products-services/vans/peugeot-boxer


The Peugeot Expert:


http://www.peugeot.com/en/products-services/vans/peugeot-expert



The Peugeot Partner:


http://www.peugeot.com/en/products-services/vans/peugeot-partner



The Peugeot Bipper:


http://www.peugeot.com/en/products-services/vans/peugeot-bipper

My opinion is I do not think they are ugly. I think they would do well. How do you put the face of Chevrolet and GMC on these vans?

Here is an interesting side fact. These vans are co developed with Fiat. So, basically Ram and Chevrolet and GMC will be selling the same vans. That is globalization for you. This is one of the many draw backs to globalization. Everything is becoming the same globally and we have fewer choices. Everyone's economy impacts the other's economy. I just hate how American things are being lost in favor of the European or Asian way or look of things. Granted, I do appreciate we can connect globally better with each other in many ways, but I just do not want to see our own personal identities and customs and traditions and identifying characteristics die in globalization. It is all about the dollar.


Let's look at the Fiat/Ram versions:


Ram Promaster:


http://www.ramtrucks.com/en/2014/ram_promaster/#promaster/bright_white/mono


http://www.ramtrucks.com/en/2014/ram_promaster/gallery/#



Ram Promaster video:

Fiat Ducato/ FIAT vans:

http://www.fiatprofessional.co.uk/uk/


http://www.fiatprofessional.co.uk/uk/Models/Ducato_Goods_Transport


This is my question if they are going through all this trouble to sell the Peugeot-Citroen van, then why are they not using the Renault version at Europe at Opel/Vauxhall?
Wouldn't it be easy to do a global designed and engineered GM van?

[Drew Dowdell]

Not just Ram, Chevrolet, GMC... but Fiat, Opel, Citroen, Peugeot... and eventually Nissan.

[Robert Hall]

This is my question if they are going through all this trouble to sell the Peugeot-Citroen van, then why are they not using the Renault version at Europe at Opel/Vauxhall?

Wouldn't it be easy to do a global designed and engineered GM van?

It would cost more $$$ and time for GM to do their own rather than a badge-engineered model. Would be cool to see a sharp angled luxury van for Cadillac..

Edited July 11, 2013 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[balthazar]

Not just Ram, Chevrolet, GMC... but Fiat, Opel, Citroen, Peugeot... and eventually Nissan.

At least when the slightly revised, multiple versions of the same thing came from the same corporation, there were arguments for it, but this is just utter madness.

Ninety-Eight- I agree with your sentiments RE 'American thing lost'... unfortunately most noobs are told 'it's fine, don't worry about it'.

[Drew Dowdell]

I'm with Ninety-Eight in asking why GM shouldn't take the lead on something like this. Let Opel work on it (gives them something useful to do) and be the design supplied to Peugeot Citroen Isuzu Holden Vauxhaull Chevy and GMC.

[Robert Hall]

I'm with Ninety-Eight in asking why GM shouldn't take the lead on something like this. Let Opel work on it (gives them something useful to do) and be the design supplied to Peugeot Citroen Isuzu Holden Vauxhaull Chevy and GMC.

I guess GM doesn't see the ROI in designing and building such product in-house.

[Z-06]

I'm with Ninety-Eight in asking why GM shouldn't take the lead on something like this. Let Opel work on it (gives them something useful to do) and be the design supplied to Peugeot Citroen Isuzu Holden Vauxhaull Chevy and GMC.

I guess GM doesn't see the ROI in designing and building such product in-house.

Isn't this utter BS repeated in practically every GM business case for sensible investments?

[Drew Dowdell]

I'm with Ninety-Eight in asking why GM shouldn't take the lead on something like this. Let Opel work on it (gives them something useful to do) and be the design supplied to Peugeot Citroen Isuzu Holden Vauxhaull Chevy and GMC.

I guess GM doesn't see the ROI in designing and building such product in-house.

If they can't find the ROI in designing and building a global small delivery van, likely based off of Delta III, then they just need to pack it up and stop building cars.

[Robert Hall]

I'm with Ninety-Eight in asking why GM shouldn't take the lead on something like this. Let Opel work on it (gives them something useful to do) and be the design supplied to Peugeot Citroen Isuzu Holden Vauxhaull Chevy and GMC.

I guess GM doesn't see the ROI in designing and building such product in-house.

If they can't find the ROI in designing and building a global small delivery van, likely based off of Delta III, then they just need to pack it up and stop building cars.

One would think so, but this is GM we are talking about...

[regfootball]

I'm with Ninety-Eight in asking why GM shouldn't take the lead on something like this. Let Opel work on it (gives them something useful to do) and be the design supplied to Peugeot Citroen Isuzu Holden Vauxhaull Chevy and GMC.

YES! TAKE THE LEAD AND BE THE BEST

otherwise it gets reduced to how well you market the same stuff that everyone else is selling. it becomes more about marketing and not about superior product.

[regfootball]

I'm with Ninety-Eight in asking why GM shouldn't take the lead on something like this. Let Opel work on it (gives them something useful to do) and be the design supplied to Peugeot Citroen Isuzu Holden Vauxhaull Chevy and GMC.

I guess GM doesn't see the ROI in designing and building such product in-house.

If they can't find the ROI in designing and building a global small delivery van, likely based off of Delta III, then they just need to pack it up and stop building cars.

FORD CAN WHY CANT GM

[Robert Hall]

I'm with Ninety-Eight in asking why GM shouldn't take the lead on something like this. Let Opel work on it (gives them something useful to do) and be the design supplied to Peugeot Citroen Isuzu Holden Vauxhaull Chevy and GMC.

I guess GM doesn't see the ROI in designing and building such product in-house.

If they can't find the ROI in designing and building a global small delivery van, likely based off of Delta III, then they just need to pack it up and stop building cars.

FORD CAN WHY CANT GM

Bankruptcy (that's been the default answer for GM behavior the last 5 years, probably will continue to be for the next 5-10)

[ZL-1]

I'm with Ninety-Eight in asking why GM shouldn't take the lead on something like this. Let Opel work on it (gives them something useful to do) and be the design supplied to Peugeot Citroen Isuzu Holden Vauxhaull Chevy and GMC.

Opel sells rebadged Fiat and Renault vans over here IIRC...

[Drew Dowdell]

I know they do... I'm suggesting that if Opel is in such dire straits these days... perhaps giving them something to work on that could have huge profit potential might not be such a bad idea.

[G. David Felt]

I agree with Drew and many others here that this is a perfect chance for GM to use the Opel Division to build a global compact to large van line that would compete rather than re-badge an ugly, very ugly Peugeot or Fiat which I just do not see what is so great about those vans after looking at all the links.

It just makes me want to

[hyperv6]

Opel has their hands full already trying to reinvent their entire line into a more expensive brand in a down economy. Opel will not do it with the present cars but with each and every new Opick they make. Buick and Opel will need 5-10 years to bring all new models to carry them closer to their goal. Opel has little time to deal with work vans that are generally sold on price and utility vs. any other quality.

Ford rebranded their little carrier from overseas and imported them from Turkey. I saw them I though that will never fly just as many here also thought and today Ford is making truck loads of money on the deal. They have been very popular and selling better than they ever believed.

This is also nothing new for GM as for how long have they also imported rebadged chassis tucks as GMC and Chevy from Asia. Now it is time for them to do the same here. Even Ram has one well with the White/Daimler vans.

The key here is get good utility, good MPG, Low operating cost and low purchase price and companies will flock to these. Styling and other issues associated with cars here are non factors. If a company can buy your product to do the job and save money they will be there with their checks in their hands.

We are not selling cars here.

[balthazar]

I remember when rolls royce & bmw said the same thing RE a really good automatic trans. They're still using the same source for their auto...... Oh yeah.

If margins are slim & the segment is slight, its one thing. If the picture is otherwise (ask Ford), investment can have its returns (yep, I realize the Connect already was). 10 years ago, there were hardly any small commercial vans available. Leaders lead, the rest follow ( or rebadge).

[smk4565]

I like that leaders lead and the rest rebadge, good line.

These commercial vans seem all the rage, maybe in 10 years time we won't even have small cars, but instead the Transit Connect and the Puegeot Partner will take the place of Civics and Rav4's. Some of these car companies seem more interested in getting a commercial van than they do in building a good mid-size car.

You'd think that the Cruze diesel would be a good basis for a van, because if you took that chassis and strengthened it and beefed up the suspension, all you have to do is convert the unibody to a box and you have a van, with the desired torque and fuel economy that the business customer needs.

Edited July 13, 2013 by smk4565

[hyperv6]

With all the other product GM needs to have great investment in and divisions to fix and new technology they need to invest in for higher MPG I see the rebadge is more then enough here. They will make a good profit here and can do something here once they get the rest of their house in order.

[ocnblu]

The '14 TransitConnect is a sharp little van, imo. I know they're keeping diesels out of their U.S. versions because of costs, but I think it would be really cool to have one with a diesel that could be driven daily and then used to camp in on the weekends. I've seen several clever camper conversions on the current version.

See, even non-commercial users find them useful. GM needs to wake up and smell the coffee.

[hyperv6]

The most pressing need is a replacement for the large Chevy Van. Ford will have their new Larger Transit out this year to take the place of the old discontinued Econoline. Chevy has had it easy in this segment but with the new van comes lower operating cost and GM will have to have something for it.

In the mean time they do not have the time and money to mess with the smaller segment unless they have something coming that can fill this need that we have not seen.
GM has so much to do and only so much money and man power that the rebadge is not a cop out but a link to when they address the issue properly.

The one vehivcle that was doing well for small companies was of all things the HHR panels. There are still many full and half panels still in use. They were cheap to run, hauled light loads with no issue and were cheap to buy. GM needs something small like this and they needed 4 years ago so we can either rebadge or we can wait 4-5 more years.

[NINETY EIGHT REGENCY]

Hyperv6:

Thank you for your clear and concise explantations. I had a conversation with some guy on another GM forum last night and I think he may have worked for GM because he was saying the same things you are saying about Opel and Buick and what GM is trying to do. They were detailed explanations just like yours. He said the same things about why GM is making the most of what they have and reinventing Opel and Buick in the processes. This why why GM is reabadging the Peugeot-Citroen vans to be in the Euro Van game. They cannot afford to lose out. GM and Ford did not count on the success of Ford Transit Connect. GM knows like you said they have to act instead of react. I was told going forward the Opels and Buicks will be designed and engineered for America, China, and Europe. Buick and Opel have to do a image change and just like Cadillac go through a renewal process that GM will have to invest and build on for years. It is about being competitive. Opels and Buicks will be aimed at high end Volkswagens and low end Audis. I was also told that Americans are more receptive to imports or Euro designs as opposed to Europeans who are not as receptive to American designs.

The reason why Buick ended up with Opels was because Buick did not have anything in the pipeline and they used that money on the suvs as the suvs are making money and bring profit to GM. They also are converging things globally.

Chevrolet- Holden

Buick- Opel/Vauxhall

GMC

Cadillac- If you notice most of their products are unique to them with the exception of the Escalade. This is something Ford has not done with Lincoln yet.

The current situation with Buick is a temorary fix until the real product can come. I was told the Monza concept car that was partitally unveiled is an example of the new Buick-Opel image and look.

As far as these vans, this is just to keep GM in the game until they have time later to invest in a global commercial van. GM will modify them I am sure to look like GMC and Chevrolet.

Looks like Volkswagen is testing their Euro Van in Arizona. No one knows why.

Sighted: Volkswagen Crafter

[hyperv6]

VW is testing here as I am sure they will sell their van not only here but also in other places like the middle east. Testing is safer in Winslow vs. Syria right now!

The realignment of GM is just now showing itself and more people will start to see the picture. Those of us who watch GM have seen this and understand what has been taking place but the product the most obvious sign of the realignment just has not taken place.

Too many people look at GM and what they are doing and only think products but tend to leave out the business end of things. There is much more than just numbers and building cars on emotion or feeling. Anymore you have to get the most out of each platform and return on investment. While we on the web pine away about building diesel powered AWD wagons here there are people at GM would like to build these but they have to maximize the return on investment and that is difficult when all those who say they will buy it do not show up at the dealers when they do. Now that GM has a Diesel Cruze it will be interesting to see just how many buy, As for those who say they will not buy because it has leather seats etc. really were never in the market anyways as if you really wanted a Diesel would a seat fabric really stop you?

GM needs to be in this segment now and not 5 years from now. Even with the way things are going it may take time to get new product here so they need to take advantage of what resources they have. God knows there are still a lot of Isuzu's with bow ties still working for a lot of companies and each one made GM money and companies loved them as they saved money not only buying them but also in MPG with the turbo Diesels.

That Scott really knows his stuff. PM sent!

Edited July 14, 2013 by hyperv6

[NINETY EIGHT REGENCY]

Very much so correct Hyperv6. I cannot add anything to what you have said.

[riviera74]

Whichever way this goes, I have one question: When will GM have product in this segment that people can actually buy?!

[balthazar]

...I see the rebadge is more then enough here.

Except an obvious rebadge is at the bottom of effort among automotive programs. Unless you were thinking of some slip-shod Chinese knock-off, a rebadge, at best, can only be "enough" and never "more than enough".

1. Unique, groundbreaking product

2. 'in the pack' product

2. collaboration w/ another company

4. subpar product

5. well-done revamp of another's product

6. straight rebadge

7. horrific chinese knock-off

[hyperv6]

Whichever way this goes, I have one question: When will GM have product in this segment that people can actually buy?!

Rebadge they will have it this year and start nee product to replace it in 5 years.

[hyperv6]

...I see the rebadge is more then enough here.

Except an obvious rebadge is at the bottom of effort among automotive programs. Unless you were thinking of some slip-shod Chinese knock-off, a rebadge, at best, can only be "enough" and never "more than enough".

1. Unique, groundbreaking product

2. 'in the pack' product

2. collaboration w/ another company

4. subpar product

5. well-done revamp of another's product

6. straight rebadge

7. horrific chinese knock-off

What the hell are you thinking as even the Chinese do not like their own products in the automotive field. And I am speaking of a true Chinese vehicle not a joint partnership vehicles.

GM would simply form an alliance with a present partner or a partner in needs of help or more sales and do what is needed to bring this to market.

The simple fact is GM has nothing in this small van segment and nothing that they can do short term to be in it soon. Also they have to look to challage the larger Ford Transit. I would not be surprised if they have something started on both but it could be anything from 2-6 years before we see anything and they can not be left with an empty bag. If they can at least establish a foot hold in the segment with a somewhat solid performer and then build in that with a step up over the others in the market.

While Ford may have set the standard and put GM at a disadvantage but GM will have an advantage to bring a better product in when they get it ready.

Edited July 14, 2013 by hyperv6

[balthazar]

GM has had an 'empty bag' AFA competitive small van for years now, so obviously they "can" be left that way. Now, I do not mean to say they SHOULD, just that they ARE.
OEMs frequently have empty slots in their portfolios- this is nothing new. Look at GM's minivan segment- dead for years & years & years- they abandoned that market.

The point was : GM has been 'front line' in truck development for 50-some years, if there is money to be made here, built the best ROI product you can. Slapping a $500-1000 profit on a vehicle that's going to be offered by 5 other manufacturers simply with different IMP bumpers does not make for a long-term plan of success. We've seen ENOUGH short-term planning from GM.

[hyperv6]

The reality is they have nothing to give now or in the near future of their own.

GM needs to take advantage of Peugeot, Nissan or what ever partner with a solid vehicle if need be to have at least something to sell and to establish a presents in the market.

What GM did for 50 years means little now as they have closed down nearly all of their heavy truck lines and only have some medium duty trucks left. They are behind in the van fleet class as they have had much more important needs of late. Beg borrow or steal what ever they find appropriate is the only way to not be left farther behind.
To wait 5 years for a new vehicle would be suicide.

Now if they have something pending that is a year or two out that would be even better and then just move the borrowed products aside and move to your own.

[GMTruckGuy74]

GM got out of the heavy-duty truck market 30 years ago now, and abandoned the medium-duty business 3-4 years ago. They have only remained in the light-duty business with 1500-3500 series trucks and their full-size vans have been left to wither on the vine (until this year with the introduction of the new Ford Transit vans, they have not had cause to revamp their Savana/Express vans). As stated, GM abandoned the minivan market and attempted to compete in this arena with the Lambda offerings. The HHR panel was a great attempt to offer a city-based commercial vehicle but failed to maintain this offering for fleet after cancelling the HHR for retail (the GMC Terrain, with its boxy styling, could have been offered in a panel-version for fleet customers to keep the HHR Panel momentum going).

Right now GM is only concerned with the profit-generating full-size pickup and SUV models and hopefully will find success with re-introducing the mid-size pickup (and eventual SUV) offering soon. I'm also hoping GM doesn't abandon the full-size van market with European offerings; I can accept a European city-van for the time being until they have the capital to invest in something of their own. But I know many commercial business owners not happy with the new Ford Transit due to it's European roots, just like they were not thrilled with then offered Dodge Sprinter. If GM can find a way to update the Savana/Express vans, they might be able to target the patriotic buyers still looking for an American designed and engineered vehicle. However, in this day & age of cost effectiveness with fleet managers, maybe an update is too late?

[hyperv6]

Terrain would have never replaced the HHR. It was more expensive even in base from and it would never get the better MPG. These two strikes would have prevented it from doing the job. I know as I have one of each now.

GM need to redo the van and offer a smaller higher MPG runabout delivery. This is where the Granite at GMC may have filled the smaller roll if it has come about. The larger van will be built here and should go global so no import stigma but even that is not as much a factor to companies looking to hold cost down in this economy and with the changes in health care.

[G. David Felt]

My brother in-law who has sprinters for his service repair business wishes GM would update their vans as he really hates the poor quality of the sprinter and the Euro roots. Hate to say it, but while many will buy the Euro re-badges to get the job done, many would prefer that they be American Engineered and built.

[Drew Dowdell]

The Sprinters seem to rust a lot faster than their American counterparts.

[hyperv6]

Sprinters rust like a Dodge van. They never were great for rust free. GM had the advantage on rust in most years of production vs. Ford or Dodge.

I used to service a lot of company trucks and vans and got to see first hand how they held up.

Edited July 15, 2013 by hyperv6

[G. David Felt]

My brother inlaw called last night to ask me where he could get a new AC pump for his sprinter since the AC died yesterday during the work day and with temps in the 80's which is hot for Seattle he was dying by the end of the day. Pointed him to a place I use to get all my AC and Radiators since they wholesale to the public.

Dodge wanted $1590.00 to replace the AC pump and recharge the system. He called and the new DENSO Pump was $195.00 plus about two hrs of his time to change over the pull and recharge the system. Cool as cold!

[balthazar]

Dealership costs for service is totally out of control. I related this before here- Chevy wanted $2200 to put new brakes lines on my 2500HD. Part of that cost was sitting on the floor with all 7 lines and hand-bending tubing to match. On a modern vehicle like this- there is really no room for an errant contour, esp if you intend to hit most of the factory retaining brackets. Meanwhile, I had CNC-bent stainless lines on my doorstep in 2 days for $299.

These import vans beg the very pertinent questions of part supply time & cost- as commercial vehicles, they lose the company money when they are down.

[hyperv6]

If it is a new vehicle they have to stock the parts and keep them available for enough time to deal with any service issues. It was never an issue on the Isuzu Chevy trucks. We had a couple where I worked and they did what was asked of them Cheap to run, Cheap to buy and lasted 10 years.

I hated to drive them as if you had any load the small turbo diesel did not handle the weight we had in them well. The company went back to V8 GMC box vans as you could over load them.

[SAmadei]

I think its fine for GM to introduce a small eurovan, which competes with the Transit... to act as a replacement for the Astro and those awful minivans. However, its my opinion that GM would be served well to update the old Express to match the pickups (like Ford did with the E-series) and sit back and sell trucks to the traditionalists that Ford loses. When I showed the Ford van guys I know the T-series and its powertrain options, they figured they were going to be forced into a GM van or a Ford box truck (The E-series is supposed to stick around a few more years for cut-aways).

I'm starting to think Nissan was pretty smart to join the traditional van market... soon they will have it all to themselves, Crown Vic-style.