What if? 2019 edition

[ocnblu]

It is no secret that currently, the US and the world are on a CUV binge.  Every niche has been explored by numerable automakers to flush out every customer.  Chevrolet is no different, and who can blame them for following the market?  Which brings us to the 2019 Chevrolet Blazer.  Billed by Chevrolet as Camaro-inspired, nevermind the internet clamor over using a revered SUV name from the past, the Blazer could have... SHOULD have, differentiated itself from a sea of CUV appliances by simply being built on the Alpha platform... like the Camaro.

A LWB Alpha Blazer would have clearly shown Chevrolet's intent to make the vehicle stand out... and tie it in irrevocably to its inspirator.  It would have added value to the brand.  It would have made the Blazer special.  Instead, they went with the lowest common denominator.

If the intent was to make it an urban, street-smart CUV... they missed a golden opportunity in the Blazer.  Agree?  Disagree?  What do you all think?

[Robert Hall]

Good idea.  Though I think it should have been on the Colorado platform and more of a Bronco competitor...more off-roady per it's namesake..

[riviera74]

1 hour ago, Robert Hall said:

Good idea.  Though I think it should have been on the Colorado platform and more of a Bronco competitor...more off-roady per it's namesake..

Possibly. I would go the other way and make the new Blazer an Alpha-based CUV and count that money.  GM had one in the first-generation Cadillac SRX.  A new RWD CUV, given the erstwhile success of BMW's SAVs, would be more viable now than fifteen years ago.

[Drew Dowdell]

I think GM is returning to its roots of using the same platform for a gazillion different vehicles that really aren't that different when you boil them down.

Blazer, Traverse, Enclave, Acadia, XT5, XT6.... and now there's word of another Buick SUV coming between Enclave and Envision.

Trailblazer, Trailblazer EXT, Envoy, Envoy EXT, Envoy XUT, Ascender, Bravada, Rainier, 9-7x

[riviera74]

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

I think GM is returning to its roots of using the same platform for a gazillion different vehicles that really aren't that different when you boil them down.

Blazer, Traverse, Enclave, Acadia, XT5, XT6.... and now there's word of another Buick SUV coming between Enclave and Envision.

Trailblazer, Trailblazer EXT, Envoy, Envoy EXT, Envoy XUT, Ascender, Bravada, Rainier, 9-7x

Badge engineering is still bad.  GM still needs to better differentiate between a Chevrolet from a GMC from a Buick from a Cadillac.  That should be easier than it was pre-BK when GM had EIGHT BRANDS!

[G. David Felt]

14 hours ago, riviera74 said:

Badge engineering is still bad.  GM still needs to better differentiate between a Chevrolet from a GMC from a Buick from a Cadillac.  That should be easier than it was pre-BK when GM had EIGHT BRANDS!

I think that will be truly delivered once GM has their skateboard platform that will allow an easy shell swap between brands with different software programming and just attach the new carriage to the skateboard and ship it.

[riviera74]

5 hours ago, dfelt said:

I think that will be truly delivered once GM has their skateboard platform that will allow an easy shell swap between brands with different software programming and just attach the new carriage to the skateboard and ship it.

I hope so.  Those harsh lessons of too little differentiation and too many brands must never be forgotten.

[Drew Dowdell]

I think GM needs a 3rd (4th?) SUV platform that is RWD. 

 

[G. David Felt]

10 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

I think GM needs a 3rd (4th?) SUV platform that is RWD. 

 

? Is this sarcasm to get a certain german badge snob to bite cause only real cars, CUVs and Trucks come from Germany and are all RWD biased cause only Germans can build quality auto's? 

[Drew Dowdell]

Just now, dfelt said:

? Is this sarcasm to get a certain german badge snob to bite cause only real cars, CUVs and Trucks come from Germany and are all RWD biased cause only Germans can build quality auto's? 

No, it isn't sarcasm.  There is no reason a similar sized FWD and RWD crossover can't sit in the same showroom. Ford is doing it. Lincoln is doing it. Infiniti is doing it.  

The Ford Explorer looks fantastic and has great proportions visually, however the move to RWD made some compromises on interior room. If you want the most space for your dollar, you need a Traverse or Pilot. 

[balthazar]

Blazer, Traverse, Enclave, Acadia, XT5, XT6...

On July 18, 2019 at 8:21 PM, riviera74 said:

Badge engineering is still bad.  GM still needs to better differentiate between a Chevrolet from a GMC from a Buick from a Cadillac.

The SUVs mentioned above certainly do not fit the "badge engineered' definition.

[Drew Dowdell]

24 minutes ago, balthazar said:

 

 

The SUVs mentioned above certainly do not fit the "badge engineered' definition.

You are right that they aren't badge jobs like the GMT360s were, but they're still too close for comfort, particularly when they all drive basically the same. 

[balthazar]

DD - you drive a lot more modern stuff than I do; does a nissan, a toyoter, a mazda in the same segment drive differently enough to influence a buyer either way? Should a manufacturer purposely differentiate from the mainstream as far as how one of their products drives, just to be 'different'? 
With very similar outputs, power trains, tires, I'd believe the differences by OEM have closed considerably over the decades.   

[Drew Dowdell]

22 minutes ago, balthazar said:

DD - you drive a lot more modern stuff than I do; does a nissan, a toyoter, a mazda in the same segment drive differently enough to influence a buyer either way? Should a manufacturer purposely differentiate from the mainstream as far as how one of their products drives, just to be 'different'? 
With very similar outputs, power trains, tires, I'd believe the differences by OEM have closed considerably over the decades.   

 

• Nissan - The CVT is the first major difference you'll notice. Handling is neutral and the ride on the softer side. The noise from either of the 4-cylinder engines choices is ugly.
• Toyota - About as mid-pack as you can get. The V6 is a lot faster than it's numbers suggest, and because Toyota has lightened the chassis, it sometimes can have difficulty keeping the power on the road. The 4-cylinder is smoother than a baby's bottom.
• Mazda - Generally unrecognized as a class above the others, but it is. One of the best handling FWD sedans I've driven. The other that gets that nod and was equally ignored was the previous generation Buick Regal.  The 4-cylinder is fine, but not as smooth as the Toyota or Honda. The turbo-4 isn't as impressive as it should be.
• Honda (you didn't ask, but I'll answer the rest anyway) - The latest Accord is the best mid-size sedan on the market in terms of ride and handling. It doesn't quite have the balance of the Mazda, feeling a tiny bit nose heavy even though there is only a 4-cylinder up there.  Holy sh!t the 2.0 Turbo is fast as heck. It's one of my few exceptions to the "No more turbo four" rule I have for my household. 
• Chevy - The Malibu is an okay, but not great car. It's eclipsed by those listed above.  Two generations ago(the one I think you have/had), it would have ranked higher.
• Ford - The Fusion is oddly Germanic. Ford did a great job with the chassis. It's a shame they are tossing it in the bin.
• VW - The Passat is oddly American.  It drives and feels big. It's not a handler. Weaksauce engines anymore.
• Hyunda and Kia - The Sonata and Optima are like every other Hyundai or Kia.... almost there, but not quite. (Exception: Telluride) Engine noise is an issue and the suspension is unnecessarily stiff such that they slam over road imperfections.
• Subaru - haven't driven one lately. 

That said, driven in normal traffic, none of the above are going to stand out (in a good way) from the others except maybe the Mazda which puts a tiny bit more fun into cornering. It is only the detractors that you'll really notice.

A different class, but I want to point out one standout in the compact class. The Mazda 3. Mazda snuck into Audi's kitchen at night and stole the recipe.  The Toyota, Kia, Hyundai, Chevy, Ford, and others are pretty milquetoast. The Sentra is a wreck.

[Drew Dowdell]

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

You are right that they aren't badge jobs like the GMT360s were, but they're still too close for comfort, particularly when they all drive basically the same. 

I'll expand on this for the latest Lambdas.  They all (of the ones I've driven) drive exactly alike when comparing like for like engines.  The only one I haven't been in yet is the XT6. But as it is less than a 10th of an inch or so of the Acadia's wheelbase, I don't expect it to drive any better or worse. 

The outgoing Ford Explorer felt heavier and more solid... primarily because it was.
The Durango and Grand Cherokee get the handling benefits of longer wheelbases and rear wheel drive. They ride like luxury cars.
The Telluride you saw my thoughts on already.
The Atlas is a lot like the Explorer.
The Pilot is loud inside, needs sound deadening. Also is a lot faster than numbers suggest.
The Highlander I haven't driven in a while, but I would expect it, like the Camry, to be exactly mid-pack.
The pathfinder is soft and wallowy. Good for long distance road trips where you need smooth and comfort. 

[balthazar]

^ Descriptor-wise, it sounds like major, marked differences. I'd like to experience them myself.

Re the Malibu (there was a '09 here, and now a '16)- some of the perception maybe colored by the age of the '09 when it left (135K vs the incoming 28K)… but they are very comparable (4-cyl, 6-spd, FWD). The '16 feels a bit more spunky and a bit more responsive, but if I were pressed, I'd rank them within 10% of each other at the same age. Not enough, were both in front of me as a new choice, to pick one over the other because of that. There are other -of course- differences in amenities/features, but I was focusing on driving characteristics per the topic here. 

Edited July 23, 2019 by balthazar