Industry News: More Luxury Car Buyers Are Moving to Trucks and SUVs

[smk4565]

I mostly wonder how many households with 2 luxury brand cars have a pick up as a 3rd vehicle though.   Because a household with a 328i and a F150 is more middle class America, than reason for Mercedes or Lexus to build a pickup to cater to them.  

The reason Rolls-Royce and Bentley have SUVs, is because they found the majority of their owners also own an SUV and they didn't want them spending that money on a G-wagen or a Cayenne or Range Rover.   I think if Lexus or Mercedes were going to jump into pickups it would be for similar reason, demand from their own customers for it.

[trinacriabob]

I'm very mixed on this.

That domestic automaker market share would climb is music to my ears.  However, if the proportion of sedans and coupes shrinks because of this dynamic and there are fewer choices for my automotive needs going forward, then I'm not a happy camper.  I'm guessing I can't have my cake and eat it, too. 

Even with GM still being the largest domestic automaker, I'm finding the choice of cars they now offer for sale beginning to look more limited, and even dismal. I'm a mid-size and nicely appointed sedan buyer at this point.  And, I'm actually amazed to see myself now driving a sedan, given that I've always had a coupe prior to this.  I will say that I don't miss the huge GM coupe doors that you had to restrain from scraping the cars next to yours in the parking lot.

[Robert Hall]

Alas, coupes have been dying off for the last 20 years or so...only 6 2dr coupes or convertibles left from the domestic 3... 

[trinacriabob]

I know.

Three of them are the pony trio and there's three more I'd have to scratch my head about.  Yes ... the Cascada, too.

Damn, the automotive world needs to wake us all up with a beautifully executed new Riviera.

[Robert Hall]

1 minute ago, trinacriabob said:

I know.

Three of them are the pony trio and there's three more I'd have to scratch my head about.  Yes ... the Cascada, too.

Damn, the automotive world needs to wake us all up with a beautifully executed new Riviera.

Challenger, Mustang, Camaro, Corvette, Cascada, ATS.. and the only 2dr SUV left is the Wrangler.  

[ocnblu]

Well I think the luxury truck trend is fine and I am delighted that more ppl are trading in BMW and Benz for American trucks, but I also have a concern that there might be a move to put the pickup truck more into a niche role, v. the universal role the pickup truck now enjoys.

[trinacriabob]

10 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Challenger, Mustang, Camaro, Corvette, Cascada, ATS.. and the only 2dr SUV left is the Wrangler.  

Except for maybe the ATS and the Cascada, none of these could really house 4 adult occupants that well, including having them enter and exit the rear seat.

So, even with 6 survivors, none of them are mainstream medium to large sized coupes that 4 or 5 people could pile into day in and day out ... like this ...

I think I'm in love ...

I had one exactly like this, sans vinyl roof and T-tops, and it was the most comfortable car I've ever owned.  I didn't slide around, like the announcer said.  I just sank right in.  It was reliable, but not as reliable as my W-bodies.  That's why, if another usable coupe came along, sign me up.

 

[Robert Hall]

Yeah, the others are more 2+2s.  I had the unpleasant experience of riding in the back seat of a '15 Mustang a couple years ago for a couple of miles...seemed very cramped inside considering big it is outside...I think my '87 Mustang has more headroom (and it is pretty cramped). 

Then again, it's probably pretty rare today that 4 adults go around in a 2dr car...I did that occasionally when I drove 2drs exclusively, but usually knew someone with a 4dr. 

Edited March 4, 2018 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[trinacriabob]

I guess it depends on the coupe.  On my '84 Cutlass Supreme Brougham coupe, the seats leaned forward quite a ways and left a pretty good gap for someone up to 5'10" or so to enter and exit.  I never had a problem getting in and out when I sat back there to clean.

I was thinking about this as several cars passed me up today.  The whole thing about cars, be they sedans or coupes, is that they offer so much more in terms of design opportunities and to carve out different personalities for themselves.  There's a lot more you can do with three volumes (hood, greenhouse, and rear lid areas) than there is with two bigger ones.  I find that, unless I look very closely, many SUVs and CUVs seem to blend together.  Perhaps it's began these segments don't interest me all that much.

[Robert Hall]

The coupes I have experience with were all on the smaller side...'86 Mustang LX,  '87 Mustang GT,  '91 Acura Legend, '91 Mercedes 300CE, '96 BMW M3...all had pretty tight back seats...  I do remember friends back in the day w/ 80s-90s GM coupes that were more spacious.   Growing up, my folks had a variety of Ford 2drs--'60s-70s Cougars, '70s-80s Thunderbirds and Mustangs--so I did ride in plenty when I was a kid. 

[balthazar]

All the 2-dr sedans & hardtops I've owned/been around were mostly full-size cars.
Next time I'm over my buddy's, I'll check out getting in/out of his '66 LeMans 2-dr rear seat.
Wife had an '87 Mustang LX but I don't remember if I was ever in it's back seat.

[trinacriabob]

I had to laugh at this.  My mind wandered over to the many uses of back seats.

As for the Pontiac, my dad had a used '70 Pontiac LeMans coupe we bought about 10 years later and with under 50,000 miles.  Color:  Bimini Blue, IIRC, with black interior. Found it in the L.A. Times.  It had been brought down from a small town in the Pacific Northwest.  Nice people selling it - none of that stupid L.A. vs. Seattle mentality back then.  It had a 250 c.i. L6 (Chevy vintage), no air, and no power accessories (yes to steering and brakes, though).  We bought it as an extra car and we joked that it was "the dog's car" because, with vinyl seats, it was the only one she was allowed to ride in.  My dad had vowed never to buy a Pontiac, because they weren't as good as Buick and Olds.  As it turned out, that  LeMans coupe this was, by far, the most reliable car the family had ever owned.  The back seat - just great.  I cut my teeth on doing small auto maintenance tasks on this car.  The engine bay was largely empty and there was a lot of leeway to get it right the first time.

This color, more or less, but the base model, sans rally wheels, hood scoops, and a spoiler:

early 70s Pontiac LeMans coupe

That model could either have a 250 (L6) or V8s displacing 350, 400, and 455 (all Pontiac versions)!  Funny how no one ever got pissed when their other GM car brands had inline 6s made by Chevy ... referring to when Chevy 350s were discovered in Olds products and how that enraged those buyers.

And Pontiac always dialed in their dashboards better than did their counterparts at Buick and Olds - IMO

LeMans dashboard

I so miss the Pontiac Motor Division.

[balthazar]

• To address one of your likely 'back seat thoughts', TCB - at the time my girlfriend/wife was driving the '87 stang, I was driving a '78 Plymouth sedan, which I soon upgraded to a '64 Catalina sedan. I don't have the Cat's specs at my fingertips, but the '59 Buick coupe rear seat was a smidge over 66" wide.

• Pontiac ditched their proprietary OHC I-6 the year before. But with the focus on the plethora of V8s available in any given GM car, I guess the usage of the Chevy I-6 was of no consequence then. Supporting that theory is the bru-ha-ha only 4 years later with the 350s. 'Don't mess with our V-8s!' consumers grumbled.

• It's funny how ingrained brand loyalty was 'back in the day'- in hindsight it's hard to grasp how deep those roots ran. My grandfather & father (and in turn; me) were Pontiac men since 1955. Both of them also had a smattering of Olds' & Buicks (and I have my B-59), but Pontiac was the king of the '60s because of the hardware (engineering, styling, race heritage & image).

[trinacriabob]

The whole 350 thing was because every division was producing one in those years, so it could fly undetected until ... drum roll ... it hit the service department for some type of repair or service.  And there were different schools of thought as to which was better.  For one thing, Olds buyers paid more for their cars and wanted an Olds engine, and not a Chevy engine.  I prefer an Olds V8 to a Chevy V8.  I don't know why ... but right down to the way it sounds and it's laid out.  The plugs are not grouped in twos and they sit up higher.  The only thing was that, when equipped with A/C, two spark plugs were "inaccessible" on an Olds V8s.  If not, then they were all very easily reachable by hand.

However, when they're dropping in just one 250 or just one 231, the mix up would have never happened when someone's car needed to be serviced.  Any V6 Olds Supreme (downsized version) from '78 to '87 ran with the Buick V6 carbureted engine.  No complaints heard.  Any mid-70s Pontiac of LeMans and Ventura size that offered a smaller entry level V8 would be getting the Olds 260.  No complaints heard.

I can't remember.  The Pontiac OHC I-6 was a 230 or something like that?  That damn Chevy inline 6 was indestructible.  Boring, yes, but extremely reliable and easy to work on.

Less is more, sometimes ...

Edited March 5, 2018 by trinacriabob

[balthazar]

But recall that the '350 debacle' is what generated the legalese 'GM vehicles produced with engines from various divisions' or the like, precluding any class-action suits/ complaints.
The initial PMD OHC I-6 was 230 CI, but it may have enlarged to 250 by '69.

[trinacriabob]

Wow, this thread has taken on some tangential qualities, so I'll add a little more.  I once read this info about the Olds 350 Rocket V8.  Whenever they've modified it, either down (260, 307) or up (403), the stroke has remained the same, so it was the bore that was changed.  So, when they initially did that with the 260, the space for the cooling jackets in the block was increased.  However, the cooling jackets on the 403, since it remained a small block, got narrower and it supposedly ran a little hotter and/or presented some cooling challenges.  The 403, if we recall, was the replacement for the big block 455 Rocket V8.  (That's another study in duplication - a 454 by Chevy and 455s by both Pontiac and Olds.)

Back on track, this trend toward SUVs and trucks sort of became apparent to me the other day as I was driving.  I noticed that the center mounted stop lamp no longer sits at the base of most backlites.  In the new Malibu and Impala, for example, it is wedged in at the very top of the backlite, where it meets the roof line.  The math of more people buying vehicles where they will be sitting up higher probably dictated this design change.

Edited March 8, 2018 by trinacriabob

[balthazar]

... and a 455 @ Buick. All completely proprietary, of course.

260 is at least as early as '75, 403 came online in '77 (correct: to supplement the loss of the 455), and the 307 came out for '80. Interesting that Olds chose to retain the con rods/crank and bore the block/change the piston. 260 to 403 only meant about 3/4-in larger diameter pistons, but I could see that impacting cooling capacity, yes.

The math of more people buying vehicles where they will be sitting up higher probably dictated this design change.

Agreed.

[trinacriabob]

Absolutely to the 260 in 1975 - our next door neighbors opted for a Cutlass Supreme of that year with that engine.  I know that it ran at least 140,000 hassle free miles without giving up the ghost, and then some

Absolutely to the 403 in 1977 - it replaced the 455 in the newly downsized Ninety Eights and Eighty Eights, alongside other similarly sized BOP products that were also downsized that year.

I think you're right as to the 307 - it might have come on board at that time to power the Toro or the full sizes.  However, the 260 was still available in the '82 Cutlass Supreme/Calais, with the 307 being the V8 option beginning in 1983 for the remainder of its life as a RWD. 

Edited March 8, 2018 by trinacriabob