Chevrolet News:Chevrolet Still Sees Cars As An Important Part Of Their Lineup

[William Maley]

Chevrolet believes that it gain more market share in subcompacts to full-size sedans as other competitors leave the market, most notably Ford.

"It's a pretty big opportunity for us. As other people are making noise about leaving the car business or thrifting back their portfolio, there's still business to be had there. It's just going about the business in a smart fashion," said Steve Majoros, Chevrolet's marketing director for cars and crossovers to Automotive News.

While the car market in the U.S. continues to shrink as more buyers go for SUVs and crossovers, it still represents more than four million possible customers and an opportunity for Chevrolet to introduce itself to this group. Plus, compact and midsize segments still representative one in every five vehicles sold. Majoros believes that sales of cars have "hit the floor."

"There's still volume to be had there. We've done a nice job about taking a responsible approach to the product. If other competitors are leaving, we're very happy to pick up that business, and we'll certainly do that."

Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

View full article

[G. David Felt]

Totally agree with GM, there is still valid business to be had here. No reason to abandon the car business like Ford is doing.

I still see a need to consolidate the auto business, way to many models, name plates and build capacity. I think China and Europe have pain ahead of them in a consolidation that is coming.

[riviera74]

Europe especially needs to consolidate.  That market is shrinking as we speak.  China will have a recession where some automakers will pull out or die. Survival of the fittest in action.

[smk4565]

Chevy needs to clean up Spark, Sonic, Cruze, Malibu, Impala.  5 cars is too many when they should probably have 3 and make those 3 really good.  And those 5 are especially too many when you have Volt and Bolt also, I feel like they could do a plug-in hybrid Cruze and Malibu on the next generation and retire the Volt, or make the Volt a mid-size EV sedan or something.  

[daves87rs]

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

Chevy needs to clean up Spark, Sonic, Cruze, Malibu, Impala.  5 cars is too many when they should probably have 3 and make those 3 really good.  And those 5 are especially too many when you have Volt and Bolt also, I feel like they could do a plug-in hybrid Cruze and Malibu on the next generation and retire the Volt, or make the Volt a mid-size EV sedan or something.  

True..

The Impy and Sonic are already on the way out. The sonic is extra, while models like the Malibu RS will help start easing the pain for those who will miss the Impy (like me)

While it is shrinking, there still is a market for cars out there- whether they like cars (in general) and easier for the budget. Plus, there are many who simply don't need a SUV/CUV....

GM is going to trim a few more cars out of their lineup, but being prepared (next gas spike, anyone?) doesn't hurt at all...

[Suaviloquent]

There needs to be a transition where either all these compliance cars are the ones left standing or they simply rename their compliance cars with popular name plates.

 

but they should not pull a Holden and replace the Commodore with the Insignia. That would be dumb.

[G. David Felt]

10 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Chevy needs to clean up Spark, Sonic, Cruze, Malibu, Impala.  5 cars is too many when they should probably have 3 and make those 3 really good.  And those 5 are especially too many when you have Volt and Bolt also, I feel like they could do a plug-in hybrid Cruze and Malibu on the next generation and retire the Volt, or make the Volt a mid-size EV sedan or something.  

At least it is not bloated with excessive models like Mercedes-Benz. Interesting how they innerchange roadster & cabriolet for in essence just being a convertible. Plus you also have the AMG version of just about every one of these cars.

Comparing the sales numbers to this extensive list of cars and the listing of of them shows they could cut 50% easily and not really affect sales. They might as well just make 3 really good models only since they have so many versions of each one listed here.

CAR BLOAT of Daimler Mercedes-Benz:

A-Class

• Hatchback
• Sports Tourer

B-Class

• Hatchback
• Sports Tourer

C-Class

• Cabriolet
• Coupe
• Sedan
• Plug-in Hybrid
• AMG

CLA

• 4 door Coupe
• AMG

CLS

• 4 door Coupe
• AMG

E-Class

• Cabriolet
• Coupe
• Sedan
• Wagon
• AMG

S-Class

• Cabriolet
• Coupe
• Sedan
• AMG

SL

• Coupe
• Roadster
• AMG

SLC

• Coupe
• Cabriolet
• AMG

AMG-GT

• GT
• GT Roadster
• GT C
• GT C Roadster
• GT 4
• GT 63 S
• GT R
• GT 4-Door Coupe
• GT S
• GT S Roadster

Mercedes-Maybach

• S-560
• S-650
• S-650 Cabriolet
• S-650 Pullman

[ccap41]

23 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Plus you also have the AMG version of just about every one of these cars.

That is the absolute best part about Mercedes, they make a gnarly version of everything they make.

24 minutes ago, dfelt said:

CAR BLOAT of Daimler Mercedes-Benz:

I think every manufacturer wishes they had the diverse lineup Mercedes has while still making money. I hate their coupe SUVs but everything else is about what you'd want and expect from a premier luxury automaker. 

[G. David Felt]

15 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

That is the absolute best part about Mercedes, they make a gnarly version of everything they make.

I think every manufacturer wishes they had the diverse lineup Mercedes has while still making money. I hate their coupe SUVs but everything else is about what you'd want and expect from a premier luxury automaker. 

I agree that the AMG is an awesome line just like Cadillac's V edition that I still do not get why they have not done a V-edition to every product. Escalade, XT5, etc. 

Yet the worst part is also their most common BLAH part. From the S-Class to the A-Class they all look the same. On top of this, stop duplicating with a Roadster and Cabriolet. Just do a freaking convertible for the few that want it, no need to have one in every product line that sells less than 100 a month. I truly think there is an excessive waste of car duplication in MB which also is a waste of money.

They are in their hey day and right now it is great they are so profitable to waste money on excess, but this is also how Cadillac fell and right now, the German brands have allot of black eyes due to the diesel emission scandal and other issues. 

If all was great in Daimler, they would not have broken the company down into 3 stand alone divisions. Starting next year, a true picture will show on just how well Mercedes-Benz is doing now that the other profit sections are broken out from them.

 

[ccap41]

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

Just do a freaking convertible for the few that want it, no need to have one in every product line that sells less than 100 a month. I truly think there is an excessive waste of car duplication in MB which also is a waste of money.

As consumers, we should be welcoming a brand that is giving us this many options. Yes, I personally, could care less about any convertibles but if you are in the market for a convertible MB has like 6 different vehicles available in convertibles and all three GM brands has two and one is pretty crappy in the Buick Cascada. 

They're not wasting yours or my money so I see zero issue with them having this many options. 

Cadillac has never had this many options across their brand. 

[G. David Felt]

5 hours ago, ccap41 said:

As consumers, we should be welcoming a brand that is giving us this many options. Yes, I personally, could care less about any convertibles but if you are in the market for a convertible MB has like 6 different vehicles available in convertibles and all three GM brands has two and one is pretty crappy in the Buick Cascada. 

They're not wasting yours or my money so I see zero issue with them having this many options. 

Cadillac has never had this many options across their brand. 

MB Brand covers Chevy versions to luxury versions and they are watering down their brand as a luxury line with the excessive duplication at every level. They are the king right now from a brand standpoint but I see them already dropping as their ATP is not what it used to be, people are confused as to what they want to be. They would have been better off doing a low to mid level brand line under a different name.

I have to question if Mercedes-benz will be the same company in 10 years.

[smk4565]

As far as Mercedes goes, I think they can kill the CLA because they have the A-class sedan which looks better and is more functional.  They can also kill the SLC because compact roadster is a pretty tiny segment, they could probably sell that buyer a C-class convertible.  

But the rest of those cars they need, because they sell wagons in other parts of the world and they sell a lot of S-classes globally and that is their #1 margin car.   And like ccap said, having all those choices is good for the consumer.  

I will say I think the new CLS is ugly, the E-class looks better and the AMG sedan looks better so that CLS is pointless but someone will buy it and it isn’t costing them much to re-body an existing car.

Perhaps Chevy could make the Impala a mid-size electric sedan to carry on with the name plate.  An electric sedan with external dimensions of a Malibu would have interior dimensions of an Impala, if not more.

[smk4565]

3 minutes ago, dfelt said:

MB Brand covers Chevy versions to luxury versions and they are watering down their brand as a luxury line with the excessive duplication at every level. They are the king right now from a brand standpoint but I see them already dropping as their ATP is not what it used to be, people are confused as to what they want to be. They would have been better off doing a low to mid level brand line under a different name.

I have to question if Mercedes-benz will be the same company in 10 years.

Where is the overlap other than SL and AMG GT ?  which are basically the same size and price, but one is a luxury car the other is a sports car.  There is $55,000 between an E400 coupe/convertible and an S560 coupe/convertible , that is spread apart pretty well.

You can argue CLA and CLS are pointless but they are just body styles of the A and E class.  Especially when the AMG GT sedan has an inline six option, you might as well get that over a CLS53.   And people buy those coupe SUV’s, my friend bought a GLE coupe because he liked that body style, and he had 2 BMW’s before that.

Mercedes still has the highest ATP of any full line luxury brand, they aren’t hurting there.  I think in 10 years they will be stronger because of their electric cars.  Mercedes is going to put a hurt on Tesla because 80% of electric Mercedes won’t need to go down a re-work line or leave the factory with miss-matched door trim, etc.

[ccap41]

11 minutes ago, dfelt said:

MB Brand covers Chevy versions to luxury versions and they are watering down their brand as a luxury line with the excessive duplication at every level. They are the king right now from a brand standpoint but I see them already dropping as their ATP is not what it used to be, people are confused as to what they want to be. They would have been better off doing a low to mid level brand line under a different name.

I have to question if Mercedes-benz will be the same company in 10 years.

So what? The models that compete with the "luxury only" Cadillac are still superior vehicles in most ways. Then their low appliance-like cars are still offered with a gnarly AMG variant. 

They don't have duplications anywhere. Where do they have two of the same cars offered? The closest things would be the GLE and the GLE Coupe(and GLC). 

The only two vehicles that come off in any possible way as appliances are the CLA and GLA. Everything else is very premium for their respective classes.

[ccap41]

15 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Where is the overlap other than SL and AMG GT ?

They've never been produced at the same time, have they? If they did it had to have been leftovers of the SL selling while the AMG GT was being produced. 

[Robert Hall]

19 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

They've never been produced at the same time, have they? If they did it had to have been leftovers of the SL selling while the AMG GT was being produced. 

They still make the SL and AMG GT AFAIK...

16 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Where is the overlap other than SL and AMG GT ?  which are basically the same size and price, but one is a luxury car the other is a sports car.   

There is a $36k spread between the SL and AMG GT roadster starting prices...( going off the prices listed on the MB USA website). 

Edited August 30, 2018 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[ccap41]

1 minute ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

They still make the SL and AMG GT...

OH SL! I was thinking SLS the whole time. Thank you! ?‍♂️

[Robert Hall]

1 minute ago, ccap41 said:

OH SL! I was thinking SLS the whole time. Thank you! ?‍♂️

Ah, yeah..the AMG GT replaced the SLS. 

[ccap41]

18 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Ah, yeah..the AMG GT replaced the SLS. 

Yeah that's why I was confused because I really didn't think they were ever produced side-by-side. 

[Robert Hall]

17 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Yeah that's why I was confused because I really didn't think they were ever produced side-by-side. 

Probably not much...they did overlap in the 2015 model year.  Production of the SLS ended in 2014, production of the AMG GT began in 2014.

[ccap41]

On 8/29/2018 at 9:00 AM, dfelt said:

car duplication in MB

What duplication? 

54 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

There is a $36k spread between the SL and AMG GT roadster starting prices...( going off the prices listed on the MB USA website).

While there is definitely some overlap one is a GT car and one is a sports car. At least that is how I view them. 

[Robert Hall]

8 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

What duplication? 

While there is definitely some overlap one is a GT car and one is a sports car. At least that is how I view them. 

Yeah, and the one named GT is the sports car.  Kind of ironic. 

[ccap41]

9 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Yeah, and the one named GT is the sports car.  Kind of ironic. 

Hahaha, RIGHT???

[Robert Hall]

I like the look of the racing version of the GT..

[ccap41]

I just think the car looks hot in general. 

[ccap41]

On 8/29/2018 at 9:00 AM, dfelt said:

car duplication in MB

@dfelt Why no response? 

[G. David Felt]

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

@dfelt Why no response? 

Why bother, you do not see duplication as well as SMK you guys see nothing but perfection in MB with all their excessive versions of auto's and blah style excluding AMG. you guys seem to see nothing wrong with MB much how people saw Cadillac in the 80's before their complete bust. 

excluding size, the minuscule amount of sales in the all convertibles to sedans, etc. shows why Parent Daimler broke up the company, they see weakness and my gut tells me they are making changes behind the scenes as I suspect you will see a reduction in product versions. No company is perfect and the Americans especially so. Germans are where America was in the 70's to 80's. history is repeating itself and the Germans are about to implode but you guys do not see it, enjoy your rosy glasses of German superiority.

[ccap41]

14 hours ago, dfelt said:

Why bother, you do not see duplication as well as SMK you guys see nothing but perfection in MB with all their excessive versions of auto's and blah style excluding AMG. you guys seem to see nothing wrong with MB much how people saw Cadillac in the 80's before their complete bust. 

excluding size, the minuscule amount of sales in the all convertibles to sedans, etc. shows why Parent Daimler broke up the company, they see weakness and my gut tells me they are making changes behind the scenes as I suspect you will see a reduction in product versions. No company is perfect and the Americans especially so. Germans are where America was in the 70's to 80's. history is repeating itself and the Germans are about to implode but you guys do not see it, enjoy your rosy glasses of German superiority.

So you're still not going to give examples of how they have duplicates in their lineup? That has nothing to liking or disliking a brand.  

And no, I don't find perfection in their lineup. Is it more full or better than most? I don't see any objective reason why it wouldn't be considered the top luxury brand. 

[Robert Hall]

14 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

So you're still not going to give examples of how they have duplicates in their lineup? That has nothing to liking or disliking a brand.  

And no, I don't find perfection in their lineup. Is it more full or better than most? I don't see any objective reason why it wouldn't be considered the top luxury brand. 

M-B has arguably the most diverse brand lineup amongst all automakers...very broad w/ a models in many segments, and multiple body styles for several models.  Nothing wrong with that.. 

[ccap41]

7 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

M-B has arguably the most diverse brand lineup amongst all automakers...very broad w/ a models in many segments, and multiple body styles for several models.  Nothing wrong with that.. 

Absolutely. And within each model they have a couple engine choices as well. As a consumer, we should at least love what they bring to the market even if you don't like the products' styling/design. 

[G. David Felt]

3 hours ago, ccap41 said:

So you're still not going to give examples of how they have duplicates in their lineup? That has nothing to liking or disliking a brand.  

And no, I don't find perfection in their lineup. Is it more full or better than most? I don't see any objective reason why it wouldn't be considered the top luxury brand. 

Other than class size, there is minimal differences between one over the other priced next model up.  Call it a roadster or cabriolet it is the same convertible with trim differences.

@Cubical-aka-Moltar I agree on a full portfolio of putting a blah model into every size category but I would not call it diverse in that from A to S they all look the same, pretty much all have the same interior to exterior. 

Exception is their AMG line that does nicely stand out from the rest and the custom order version of the S-class. 

Rest of the product line up , most people cannot tell the difference between.

[ccap41]

You're right, I doubt anybody can tell the difference between the CLA and S Class.

Aren't you a Cadillac fan? And you're okay with them doing the same thing from ATS to CT6? Every automaker has come to this. MB is no exception, it's the norm. 

[G. David Felt]

18 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

You're right, I doubt anybody can tell the difference between the CLA and S Class.

Aren't you a Cadillac fan? And you're okay with them doing the same thing from ATS to CT6? Every automaker has come to this. MB is no exception, it's the norm. 

Yes I am a fan of Cadillac but their CT & XT is Bullshit. I disagree with much that the now gone idiot leader did. Quality building should always be job one for every auto OEM out there. Cadillac has a rich history and we need to stop the madness of following what the Germans are doing. 

Bring back the Eldorado, Brougham and many other great name plates. Ignore the crazy like numbering that was Cadillac of 1904 to 1950. Focus on giving us the great concepts they have shown off.

I see no reason to now have as @smk4565 has stated a compact, mid and large CUV plus Escalade, Escalade ESV, in both regular, sport and V editions for all products. But use the rich history of names to set Cadillac apart.

Why not have the Fleetwood, Fleetwood Brougham, DeVille, Coupe DeVille, etc. There is no reason to not also bring out the concepts as a La Salle Roadster would be nice or the Imaj, Elmiraj, Escala, Converj. 

We have had many of us state that Lincoln was right to go back to their roots with the Continental regardless if we like the car or not, Cadillac needs to do the same.

Cadillac has history that people around the world remember of the rich names, not the German bland boring letters / numbers.

Let the Germans have their naming system.

Let the Americans have their names of richness in building quality competitive products.

[smk4565]

22 hours ago, dfelt said:

Why bother, you do not see duplication as well as SMK you guys see nothing but perfection in MB with all their excessive versions of auto's and blah style excluding AMG. you guys seem to see nothing wrong with MB much how people saw Cadillac in the 80's before their complete bust. 

excluding size, the minuscule amount of sales in the all convertibles to sedans, etc. shows why Parent Daimler broke up the company, they see weakness and my gut tells me they are making changes behind the scenes as I suspect you will see a reduction in product versions. No company is perfect and the Americans especially so. Germans are where America was in the 70's to 80's. history is repeating itself and the Germans are about to implode but you guys do not see it, enjoy your rosy glasses of German superiority.

As I said, I think the CLA and CLS are pointless because I think the sedan version of both looks better, and there is an E-class 2 door coupe.  But even more so they don't need the SLC because there is just really no market for that sort of car, I think a more track based sports car at that price point would work better.

Besides that, Mercedes-Benz Cars did 94.7 billion Euros in revenue in 2017 with 9.2 billion euros in EBIT and a 9.7% margin.  All improvements over 2016.  Daimler as a whole did 164.3 billion euro in revenue and 14.7 billion euros in EBIT.   62.5% of their earnings are from the cars division on 59% of the company revenue.  Cars is their strongest, most profitable division.

[smk4565]

4 hours ago, dfelt said:

Yes I am a fan of Cadillac but their CT & XT is Bull$h!. I disagree with much that the now gone idiot leader did. Quality building should always be job one for every auto OEM out there. Cadillac has a rich history and we need to stop the madness of following what the Germans are doing. 

Bring back the Eldorado, Brougham and many other great name plates. Ignore the crazy like numbering that was Cadillac of 1904 to 1950. Focus on giving us the great concepts they have shown off.

I see no reason to now have as @smk4565 has stated a compact, mid and large CUV plus Escalade, Escalade ESV, in both regular, sport and V editions for all products. But use the rich history of names to set Cadillac apart.

Why not have the Fleetwood, Fleetwood Brougham, DeVille, Coupe DeVille, etc. There is no reason to not also bring out the concepts as a La Salle Roadster would be nice or the Imaj, Elmiraj, Escala, Converj. 

We have had many of us state that Lincoln was right to go back to their roots with the Continental regardless if we like the car or not, Cadillac needs to do the same.

Cadillac has history that people around the world remember of the rich names, not the German bland boring letters / numbers.

Let the Germans have their naming system.

Let the Americans have their names of richness in building quality competitive products.

I have said for years that Cadillac should leverage their history and use word names for cars and dump the alpha-numerics.  Cadillac has been trying to copy BMW and Mercedes for the past 15 years and it hasn't worked, plus Cadillac basically wants you to forget they even made cars before year 2000, as if they are some new brand like Tesla.  They don't even want you to remember the Catera which they made into the early 2000s, let alone products like the Eldorado or Fleetwood.  I say this is all a mistake.

And I bet every Cadillac fan out there wishes they had more models.  Who doesn't want a CTS coupe, CTS convertible, a mid-engine Cadillac sports car, V-series SUV's, etc.  And they absolutely still need an SUV between XT5 and Escalade, I think there is room for an SUV above the Escalade.  Also why only 1 engine option in an XT5 and 1 in the Escalade?  The GLC has 4 engine options counting the hybrid, the GLE has 4 powertrains, GLS has 3 and is rumored to get a 4th, etc   A luxury brand should have choices, Chevrolet gives you more engine options in their SUVs than Cadillac does in theirs.

[trinacriabob]

I'm lost when I look at this trend.  What happened?  Only 3 divisions of GM offer vehicles.  Among these 3 divisions, there are only 5 fossil fuel burning vehicles that mostly fall between MSRPs of $20,000 and $45,000.

These five are:

Buick: (1) LaCrosse, (2) Regal

Chevrolet:  (1) Impala, (2) Malibu, and (3) Cruze

I'm talking about where normally equipped models usually land in terms of MSRP.  (I know there might be a Cadillac model that might start at $41,000 or so before options and freight and that some Cruzes start in the high teens before options and freight.)

This is ridiculous.  I don't like most of these cars.  I think a lot of people don't much care for them.  Maybe they're not selling many because they're not interesting or value laden cars. 

Edited September 14, 2018 by trinacriabob

[Robert Hall]

10 hours ago, trinacriabob said:

I'm lost when I look at this trend.  What happened?  Only 3 divisions of GM offer vehicles.  Among these 3 divisions, there are only 5 fossil fuel burning vehicles that mostly fall between MSRPs of $20,000 and $45,000.

These five are:

Buick: (1) LaCrosse, (2) Regal

Chevrolet:  (1) Impala, (2) Malibu, and (3) Cruze

I'm talking about where normally equipped models usually land in terms of MSRP.  (I know there might be a Cadillac model that might start at $41,000 or so before options and freight and that some Cruzes start in the high teens before options and freight.)

This is ridiculous.  I don't like most of these cars.  I think a lot of people don't much care for them.  Maybe they're not selling many because they're not interesting or value laden cars. 

GM has shifted their focus to trucks, CUVs and SUVs which are higher profit, and left the sedan market to the Japanese big 3 and Korean brands that seem to be able to profitably build and sell sedans. 

[G. David Felt]

13 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

GM has shifted their focus to trucks, CUVs and SUVs which are higher profit, and left the sedan market to the Japanese big 3 and Korean brands that seem to be able to profitably build and sell sedans. 

Because they cannot do to full size trucks and SUVs what GM and Ford does? ? ?‍♂️

[Suaviloquent]

It’s the chicken tax. And also that they would never produce volumes of 400,000+ units needed, and that the American pickup market has trucks that just don’t really sell anywhere else.

[balthazar]

Trucks have much higher profit margins than cars do, why would any OEM 'need' to sell 400+K to make a profit? Many models sell in the low 1000s/yr, assumedly at a profit...

[trinacriabob]

But there will always be consumers who are car people.  I think GM's sales slump in cars is because of their car designs and the (lack of) variety they offer.  True, the Asians have the mid-size car market cornered (Camry, Accord, Altima, Sonata, etc.)  I think a good design and a solid car would bring the buyers over - "if you build it, they will come."  When the Olds Intrigue appeared on the scene, people snatched them up in no time flat.  Why drive a Camry when you can drive that?  That car quickly and quietly stole some market share from the Japanese.

Also, people like those earnings on their GM Buypower credit card.  Right now, my eye wanders over to non-pimpy Dodge Chargers when driving around. That's my sort of sled, among current car offerings.  I know about the profit margins on trucks.  I was once given a Traverse as a rental (I reviewed it) and it's very commanding and surprisingly smooth and quiet, but it's not my cup of tea at all. 

I'd like to remain optimistic that GM is committed to anchoring their car product lines as well.

Stiff competition for the Camry back in the day ...

Edited September 15, 2018 by trinacriabob

[Suaviloquent]

I mean to be seen as a competitive threat Toyota should make HD’s out of its Tundra.

and then sell close to RAM levels of trucks to be seen as true competitor. With the way Toyota treats it’s trucks you’d think they’d cancel it because it is wholly uncompetitive except it’s been out so long and so little has changed that the kinks and issues have been largely ironed out.

[G. David Felt]

49 minutes ago, Suaviloquent said:

I mean to be seen as a competitive threat Toyota should make HD’s out of its Tundra.

and then sell close to RAM levels of trucks to be seen as true competitor. With the way Toyota treats it’s trucks you’d think they’d cancel it because it is wholly uncompetitive except it’s been out so long and so little has changed that the kinks and issues have been largely ironed out.

White collared, small height people tend to buy asian trucks. I totally agree that they are old and have the kinks ironed out, but as long as they build for small people, the larger redneck, physical working Americans will still go with GM / Ford / RAM. 

Asian Trucks, CUVs, cars mean little people in my book and this continues to prove out even in the improved Mazda CX9 that has a better interior than the one I rented 2 years ago, but is still built for small people.

[Suaviloquent]

The hell are you talking about DFelt. When the Tundra was new it had the largest cab sizes available in its class

The Taco has only recently had competition.

Honda Accord is supremely spacious. So is Camry. Literally every excuse of the American cars is that they’re too small. Way to go to pick on Mazda. The CX9 was not built for small people. It was built to kick every other 3 rows ass in style. And it does that in spades.

[G. David Felt]

3 hours ago, Suaviloquent said:

The hell are you talking about DFelt. When the Tundra was new it had the largest cab sizes available in its class

The Taco has only recently had competition.

Honda Accord is supremely spacious. So is Camry. Literally every excuse of the American cars is that they’re too small. Way to go to pick on Mazda. The CX9 was not built for small people. It was built to kick every other 3 rows ass in style. And it does that in spades.

Nope, CX9 sucks on space, people over 6' tall are cramped, lack of versatile seats was a big problem till this years version and still you hit your head getting into them due to their Komodo dragon style of extreme sloped windshield. Mazda Failure.

Trucks, Tundra had the measurements, but not the real space same with the taco. 

Measurements but not real space for real large Americans.

Your probably average, 5'8" to 5' 10" tall, try getting into them when your 6'6" tall and large frame. Asian built for small petite Asian size.

[Suaviloquent]

Then how do you explain that the Asian makes still sell minivans, quite literally the most spacious passenger vehicles one can buy without buying a bad guzzling full size.

And again you’re picking on Mazda as the example of every Asian make. What a dumb thing to do. 

Remind me when Ford will make a full-size sedan with headroom again. Or when Cadillac decides to sell the ATS-L. And when Cadillac will make a strectch saloon that isn’t called the CT6.

It’s completely baseless to use trucks as an example of to support an argument Asian cars are designed for small people, because for the most part American brands can’t even compete on small cars. 

How do you explain that the 200 was he longest midsize yet the worst legroom? Or that Honda’s CRV is bigger than a Ford Edge? Or that GM no longer sells a minivan, and even a Traverse has less total volume than all the minivans?

Edited September 16, 2018 by Suaviloquent

[G. David Felt]

19 hours ago, Suaviloquent said:

Then how do you explain that the Asian makes still sell minivans, quite literally the most spacious passenger vehicles one can buy without buying a gas guzzling full size.

American OEMs choose to not compete, I truly think they could but a market that is not what the bulk of buyers want, so no reason to build, focused on products they do real well.

And again you’re picking on Mazda as the example of every Asian make. What a dumb thing to do. 

Nope not just picking on Mazda, but since I do have family members with the Mazda 6 and CX5, I hit all the draw backs as to why the auto's suck, same issue I run into with Toyota, Nissan, Honda, etc. Built for average size people that are petite.

Remind me when Ford will make a full-size sedan with headroom again. Or when Cadillac decides to sell the ATS-L. And when Cadillac will make a stretch saloon that isn’t called the CT6.

Totally agree, Cadillac should be selling the ATS-L and CT6-L from China here as the normal cars. The extra back leg room is what people expect in a luxury auto. No need to talk about Ford, they are running away from the passenger car business. I think it will come back to hurt them badly.

It’s completely baseless to use trucks as an example of to support an argument Asian cars are designed for small people, because for the most part American brands can’t even compete on small cars. 

LOL, I have pointed out cars and trucks in the fact that why Asian auto companies build good products, they build them for small people. I seem them every day all around me since I live next door to Little Korea Town and Work in Seattles China Town and we have an office in Little Tokyo so I am always around the very same small people that they build their auto's for.

How do you explain that the 200 was he longest midsize yet the worst legroom? Or that Honda’s CRV is bigger than a Ford Edge? Or that GM no longer sells a minivan, and even a Traverse has less total volume than all the minivans?

Simple, US OEM's do have packaging problems as they are trying to build all size cars in the same thinking of trucks or SUVs and the packaging is just wrong and sucks. Since you repeated yourself, I will repeat myself, the US OEMs walked away from the minivan business rather than compete and truly build a worthy product. Instead, showed cool concepts, build half ass products and then never marketed them.

We all know that the marketing of said auto's is terrible. Platform that they have build cars on especially the V series are solid, but the actual packaging and layout leaves much to be desired.

 

[Suaviloquent]

So in other words, you’re wrong and Asian makes do make cars for big people. The same argument applies to them.

 

they make half-asses full-sizes and instead choose to focus where they can make dominant products.

 

it’s a moot point, if you’re a tall person you can buy a Honda CRV or Pilot.

 

Don’t tell me you’ll compare a Expenditon ESV third row as the entire reason why Asian makes make cars for short folk only cos even a Sienna could hand the Escalade it’s ass in the space and space efficiency department.

Edited September 16, 2018 by Suaviloquent

[Robert Hall]

Absurd supposition about Asian vehicles being made for small people only,  considering the number of Asian brand vehicles that are specifically designed for the US market...like the Altima, Camry, Tundra, Pilot, etc.. 

Edited September 17, 2018 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[G. David Felt]

14 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Absurd supposition about Asian vehicles being made for small people only,  considering the number of Asian brand vehicles that are specifically designed for the US market...like the Altima, Camry, Tundra, Pilot, etc.. 

Absurd, NOT. Yes they are designed for the US market and to the average spec of 5'6" tall for female and 5' 8" tall for male. With company HQ that still focuses on their own view of the world and size. 

My 5' 8" tall Korean wife who spends plenty of time in the Asian rim and is always called an American asian when she was in fact born and raised in Korea but moved here to the US at 13 years of age and works out so is more muscular is always told she is fat by her cousins as they are toothpicks. There is a very different approach taken in how they look at auto's as they come from a car bases first whereas US OEMs come from a truck view first I believe.

My view and I stick by it as I spend plenty of time in Asian, German and US based auto's to see where things are tight for me, where my head hits, how things like a extreme sloped windshield of a CX9 makes it harder to get into compared to a Travers, etc.

One can clearly see the slope of the Mazda compared to the Chevy in these pictures. It makes a big difference in entry and exit to the auto. I hit this same problem on many cars but especially on asian cars with a geater sloping windshield.