Theme
An Introduction to Small Premium 
By Andrew Smith
This team is always watching global trends. In the U.S., China, and Western Europe, we see the luxury market changing radically. Clearly, luxury in the future is not only about bling. For consumers, luxury is an experience — one that requires truly premium products.
And now that you’ve seen our research on the Eco Initiative, the remaining question is, “What is the guilt-free luxury experience?” So we started on the concept of Small Premium.
One question we all wanted to explore is, “What is Premium?” Luxury is one part. Consider the idea of a small vehicle with unexpected opulence. That’s something that would be unique, but is also easy to comprehend.
Next question: “In what context can Premium be measured?” Responsive handling, creature comforts, exquisite styling, premium materials and vehicle rarity were all discussed. We all looked to other products to help us answer the question. Small electronics is an obvious avenue that we explored. Jewelry is another.
While customers have had their choice of many types of premium vehicles, from performance cars to luxury cars and SUVs, what options exist for a small vehicle that is highly desirable? We couldn’t help but think there should be more small vehicles in the market that offer something special.
We agreed that a small premium vehicle shouldn’t be viewed as a compromise in any way. It isn’t a vehicle you buy when you can’t afford the larger size version. It should be unapologetic of size and just make you feel great.
One thing to overcome would be negative associations with small vehicles, both real and perceived. So while it should benefit from a smaller, efficient package, the owner should not have to give up anything. It should be a truly premium experience. Consider moving from a larger car or crossover. The first thing I would want to keep is space. How might we achieve that? And how small should a small premium vehicle be?
We started with concept vehicles for the Cadillac and Buick brands.
Take a look at some of our ideas and tell us what you think.
133 Comments
Leave a Reply
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
to this comment On September 11, 2009 at 7:42 pm AlexD said:
I thought the Lincoln Concept C was a great interpretation of small premium. As far as size goes, around the size of the Chevrolet HHR and/or Opel Astra would be about right. An important part is the design. If it looks like a regular joe compact but with a few bits of chrome on it, it doesn’t seem like a truly premium vehicle. The design has to have “premium” baked into it – Not just thrown at it. It needs to have an extremely beautiful design that will turn heads everywhere. I think LED lighting gives a premium feel to the design of a car. Distinctive head/tail lamp designs using LEDs would be great for a compact premium vehicle.
to this comment On September 19, 2009 at 9:16 pm djobitwan7 said:
Hi people. I’m new to this site and please excuse me if i am in the wrong place, but where do i go to leave comments about what should be in any of GM’s new 2010 vehicles. Namely the Chevy Equinox. Thanks in advnace.
to this comment On October 16, 2009 at 9:58 pm FrankS said:
I agree with you as to size. While my wife and I own a CTS and a Yukon Denali, we generally take our MINI Cooper into the city. We bought the MINI because it could be fully optioned and, at the time, it had a longer warranty than most other small cars. But, at the end of the day, the small size was key to our buying decision. I’m not a fan of Lincoln styling (at least since the 1956 Continental Mark II), but you are right that their Concept C captures a Lincoln look and should appeal to their buyer. There is no reason a Buick or Cadillac couldn’t be built in this segment that reflects the identity of either brand.
I also agree with some other posts about the need to have a high quality interior in this segment with contemporary electronics.
to this comment On September 11, 2009 at 11:50 pm ed said:
If the Ipod is the “Bare Necessity” unit, then the Iphone is the “Small Premium.”
Web Access, e-mail
The reason customers are willing to pay a Premium for the Iphone
. . . even during a recession is:
1) Music
2) Movies
3) Storage
4) Video Camera
5) Radio
6) Games
7) Computer
9) Cellphone
10) Maps/GPS
11) Applications
If purchased individually, they would cost ten times as much as the Iphone,
. . . take up ten times the space and have ten different sets of instructions for use.
While the Iphone provides, Personal Fun, Friends and Assistants, any time-any where.
It’s not the size, shape, or weight of an Iphone that people buy.
. . . The design is as simple as a bar of soap.
It’s not the engineering, programming or technology that people buy.
. . . people don’t understand it, are not able to fix it or want to read manuals on it.
It’s not viruses, operation, maintenance or problems that people buy.
. . . Customers just want to enjoy all those FUNctions.
You can build a “Small Premium” vehicle
. . . the way Apple built the Iphone.
to this comment On September 12, 2009 at 8:33 pm Phil Racicot said:
The videos don’t show the cars much, and I’d like to see some specs and details.
A premium car must have a longitudinally oriented engine and must be mainly driven by it’s rear wheels! Otherwise, it’s a fake premium car like Acura…
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 10:31 am Wade Bryant said:
We’ll be adding posts that describe a couple of our Small Premium vehicle ideas soon. We wanted to start the conversations with a “blank canvas” for a couple of days to get feedback on the overall idea of Small Premium before we lead the conversation toward a couple of specific concepts.
to this comment On September 13, 2009 at 12:12 am Steven Chamberland said:
this car looks almost too futuristic and cheesy. take notes on ford with the new taurus with the twin turbo v6 and its comparable to an audi. i would like to see a beefed up version of the chevy slowbalt. i have known many people to have long reliable experiences with their chevy’s but as with all the stores going under the tacky interior is a huge turn off. build a g8 with a turbo 2.5 and a twin turbo v6 offer available all wheel drive in any if not all of your damn sadans and style style style make it look fresh my 2004 blazer looks like a 98 blazer. yes people want to enjoy luxury at less of a cost but gm is a large brand, government brand make it a people brand dont depend on analysts like this guy who think we all want to drive eco cars america still wants to have fun driving give us some horsepower .Dont scratch the ass bottom of the market leave that for kia and when everyone experiences a blown engine with them they’ll be willing to spend more money on a descent car. hopefully this reaches someone who can make a difference in this company, if not hello subaru
… also OFFER MANUAL TRANSMISSION IN MORE CARS!
to this comment On September 28, 2009 at 12:55 pm frank908 said:
A Taurus comparable to Audi? LOL okay. Ford builds a engine with a turbo and direct injection in it and suddenly they’re automotive geniuses. It’s about time they offered an engine with some juice. It only took 10 years in the making, while almost every other car company has been doing it already and doesn’t make a big deal about it.
Please GM DO NOT follow Ford with their “styling” direction. That bug-eyed Fiesta is downright dated looking. The Five Hundered eeerrrrr, Taurus, looks like it’s about to fall off it’s own suspension it’s so tall. I used to like the Mustang but with it’s mild updates, I don’t anymore. Change for the sake of changing did not help the Mustang’s looks. The interior, a worthy V6, and a V8 that doesn’t get smoked by the Camaro’s V6 is where Ford needed to spend the money, not screwing up a handsom profile with rounded edges.
I just got back from Europe (Italy, Greece), where all Americans think it is automotive heaven, and yes, there are great little cars from Peugot, Fiat, Alfa, even Hyundai, but those are the brands you saw being driven the most. If I saw two Fiesta in my travels, that was a lot. For the most part, the streets are crowded with motor cycles, mopeds, and Mercedes S/E classes. It ain’t that much better over people. They may have the cars, but most citizens don’t have the money to afford them, so be lucky we have car companies here that do offer decent cars to fit people’s needs.
to this comment On September 13, 2009 at 8:14 am Bluebird said:
Imo, small premium should encompass three goals:
First, engineering, suspension and powertrain, should be first rate without compromises. In NA this segment has generally been treated as low-rent; always excuses for final product tradeoffs as being too expensive for the segment or good enough etc. Secondly, design execution both exterior and interior exterior design, such as your sketch, should be treated as if you were designing the next CTS. Interior materials and execution should be first rate. Simply, what looks promising from afar becomes a letdown when you see it up close as the compromises in execution become readily apparent; sadly, too often the case currently. Lastly, design shouldn’t follow a scaled down larger segment approach. In other words, what works for larger segments doesn’t necessarily translate into smaller segments, e.g., Sedans.
to this comment On September 13, 2009 at 9:43 am dsuupr said:
Please follow through on this like you are the Volt. It will be the follow through of great ideas like this, not the concepts, that will change the perception of GM.
to this comment On September 13, 2009 at 2:35 pm nell_z said:
Like the Genesis, pack a lot of car into a small price tag. Many people, like me, are willing to pay more just because of how a car sounds, feels, and performs. One of my friends’ mother almost bought a Cadillac SRX, but instead got an FX35 because of the way the car sounded and felt. In order for this project to work in a market like America, you have to make sure that the car has that ‘oomph factor’ to make u go “I like the Audi A3, but something about that Buick blah-blah makes me want it that much more”. Don’t try to make that car perfect. Spend more time making sure the car ‘feels’ like what its supposed to. Also, don’t skimp on the performance, or make it fat and bloated like the LaCrosse. Curves can be streamlined. NO BLOAT!
to this comment On September 13, 2009 at 2:45 pm ed said:
I like your idea of a Skateboard-Chassis . . . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKI8hEPDjh8
Except with a “swap-able pancake shaped battery” between the axles,’ NOT Hydrogen
(I do NOT want to own the battery, just pay for the “electricity/gas” I consume)
Just add a “Bare Necessity” truck body and I’ve got all I need.
————————————————————————————————————-
The “Small Premium” part comes in with the “Upgraded Body types” and
. . . all those “Options” that people can’t live without: Cup-holders, air conditioning, etc.
Some people need a different body style to commute, or as a school bus, delivery van, shopping, taxi,
. . . status symbol, or even the little red sports car.
————————————————————————————————————-
All though . . .
. . . if you happened to have an outlet to plug in power tools,
. . . an All-Electric 3-point hitch with power take off and a few accessories like:
. . . snow plow,
. . . lawnmower,
. . . forklift,
. . . posthole digger,
. . . bucket loader,
. . . backhoe,
. . . Powered lift tailgate,
. . . etc.
If I could get them, at a tenth of the cost of buying those things separately,
. . . I’d not only save money, I’d save storage space and
. . . if they could all operate thru the same interface (say an Iphone app?)
Now that would be a “Small Premium” Multi-FUNctional Vehicle, I could be very interested in.
to this comment On September 13, 2009 at 4:10 pm mnmavrik said:
i like the look of the vehicle in the video. it should be simple (gaudy is not premium) and sleek. premium is made in the details, no overlooked detail on the interior and exterior. i’m really glad that it is hatchback in design as well, giving close to crossover utility without the SUV disadvantages. to agree with what ed said about the iphone, integration is key. however, don’t fall into bmw’s fault with the rediculously confusing driving system. i don’t think the vehicle needs to have 7 different driving settings either, but it should have AWD with a lockable setting. i also think the vehicle needs to push the envelope in some area (design, performance, efficiency etc). a premium vehicle that just blends in with the rest of the pack should not exist.
suggestion: side glass that changes tint with the oustide light intensity.
to this comment On September 13, 2009 at 7:52 pm Christopher Popa said:
Premium can be as small as you can go. For me, it would be just myself or perhaps one other person riding in the car. What would make it premium would be the treatment: the exterior design (in Buick’s case, its chrome waterfall grille, a sweepspear, beautiful flowing curves, a modern interpretation of Buick’s famous chrome road wheels, and perhaps full-width taillights) and top-quality interior materials and appointments. It cannot be an Opel with a Buick grille.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 10:34 am Wade Bryant said:
We are interested in how you would use the vehicle. If it would be just you in the car with an occasional passenger, how small should the vehicle be? Is it a sports car? Personal luxury coupe?
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 11:14 am Christopher Popa said:
Hello, and thank you for asking. Personal luxury. Just like a nice, tailored outfit which I would wear, I would want this car to “fit” me and reflect on me positively – I wouldn’t wear the wrong size (ill-fitting) clothes and I don’t need an oversized “big boat.” I’d like a stylish, modern, classy Buick that, either through the color and a few options, lets me make a personal statement. Premium luxury features, similar in idea to a contemporary living room with, for example, a fine CD / stereo like I’d have in my home. In other words, good quality craftsmanship and I’m willing to pay more for that quality. Since I live in Chicago, I most hope it would be small and practical to use around town. A beautiful design (like the LaCrosse – with a chrome Buick grille and the sweepspear). I admittedly have only a small circle of friends and family, so I doubt there’d be more than one person in the car at a time. I’d like to say it would be a good, comfortable “cruiser” on the open road, for an occasional road trip, but without the connotation of an older / traditional Buick.
to this comment On September 23, 2009 at 6:24 pm Good day said:
Hi Wade i think that the new buick concept should have a sporty like suspension for city driving with a very well orientated navigation system. There should be a rear wheel drive option with a Manuel. Also the appearance should be striking and an interior like the lacrosse but not the bloated exterior of the lacrosse. Also the engine should have instant torque for city driving and smooth acceleration. all and all it should have european flair (suspension tunning) with american quality and comfort
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 9:39 pm GARRETT said:
Why cant it be a rebadged Opel. I think bringing Opels over here as Buicks is the best thing thats ever happened for Buick. The new Opels are the cars GM should have been making all this time in the US. They not only compete with the competition but in many cases surpass it. Plus they look really ****ing nice.
Thanks
GARRETT
to this comment On September 16, 2009 at 3:14 pm Christopher Popa said:
Hi Garrett!
Because Buick has its own signature design language and traditional elements (chrome grille, protholes, sweepspear, full-width tailamps, etc.) Putting a Buick grille on an Opel doesn’t make it a Buick! New Buicks need to leapfrog the competition, not just match them. And style and heritage are two things that Buick has in abundance, except when they just slap a Buick grille onto an Opel. (I’m certainly not saying they look horrible or anything, I just mean that I want a Buick to be a TRUE Buick, designed as a Buick, not an Opel hand-me-down.)
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 10:07 pm GARRETT said:
What full-width tail lights are you talking about, and slapping some holes in the fenders or the hood can be just as easy as changing the grill.
Have you seen the new Astra or Insignia? They are not just catching up with everyone else. In my opinion their look are superior to the competition, and most of the car mags say their driving abilities are too. We need these cars over here some how, and calling them Buicks is a great thing.
You say you are a fan of Buicks design language. Are you referring to Buicks of the last 20 years?
And how does having a Buick designed by Opel affect its heritage? In my opinion it does nothing but make it better.
to this comment On September 13, 2009 at 10:00 pm Kenz300 said:
Small Premium — ??? Just finished reading the Test Drive section of USA Today for Friday September 11, 2009.
In this article the author describes the Cadillac 2010 SRX. His take is that “Caddy crossover pales next to rival Lexus RX 350.”
He also states that the “old SRX also is on Consumer Reports worst of the worst list for perennial reliability problems”
So you developed a new model to replace the worst of the worst and it still pales in comparison. You have to do better.
Another quote from the article “it wasn’t as refined, classy or comfortable. Lexus RX is a better overall machine”
GM must do better and fast …… Every new car that comes out must be a quality vehicle in every way.
Style, comfort, economy, value, interior quality, exterior quality, electronics……..I’m glad your asking for some customer input…. but I’m afraid that I have not seen anything that will stop the loss of market share..
You need to compare your vehicles to the best in class in every aspect. I do not see or feel the sense of urgency to create the best in class……. you are coming out of bankruptcy… this may be your last chance to get it right…… Good enough is not good enough…….. How many new vehicles will you get the chance to produce before the company goes under for the final time? You need to produce winners not also rans.
Produce each new vehicle like it may be the last. Make it the best it can be. Compared to the best in class it should go neck and neck to the finish based on small points of customer preference.
Good Luck — I hope you succeed — but GM has been singing the we are fixing the problems song for the last 30 years as market share continues to fall.
I want to see you succeed but I have been disappointed over and over again. The SRX is small premium ……..
Is there any down side for the team that put the SRX out if it does not measure up?
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 10:45 am Wade Bryant said:
We were thinking that Small Premium was smaller than the SRX/RX size. I saw the USA Today article on the SRX. Did you see the Motor Trend Comparison between the SRX and RX? It places the SRX on top, but clearly highlights the pros/cons of each vehicle.
I think each vehicle brand and each vehicle needs to chosse an area of focus where it can excel. I don’t think there has ever been a vehicle that beats all its competitors in every area (of course it can’t be poor in any important area). As we develop ideas around small premium, I’d like to get a sense for what premium elements are the most vital.
What are the key attributes that would make a Small Premium vehicle your top pick?
to this comment On September 15, 2009 at 11:56 am Kenz300 said:
1. For the average person buying a small premium vehicle I would assume VALUE for the price would be an important factor.
2. Don’t stick a premium label on something that is average or less. (Think Cimmoron –spelling intentional)
3. Premium interiors that do not look cheap — use quality materials — pay attention to the details.
No cheap looking plastic parts. There is quality looking plastic and cheap looking plastic.
4. Fuel economy and performance —- Think Ford eco boost
5. Electronics that truly are state of the art — Think Apple — Navi standard
6. Inside and out every detail counts — Good enough is not good enough — Think Lexus
7. Reliability — from defects in the first 30 days to reliability 5 years later.
8. Comfort — a smooth ride and comfortable seating with head and leg room.
9. Quality interior – Quality exterior – excellent ride and handling — superb electronics
10. Compare it to the best in class — If it does not match up in every aspect, fix it
to this comment On September 13, 2009 at 11:57 pm John Schmotzer said:
I currently own a Saturn Astra XR. Leather heated seats, the automated wipers, european suspension, manual transmission. The original reason I purchased this car was because it was the only car GM offered that was a manual, wasn’t an econo-box (G3), and wasn’t a cts-v. I am well aware that this car was sold at a loss to GM, however I would say, that car should be the starting point for your entrance into the compact luxury car market. The interior would need a less simplistic look (the dash specifically). The engine would need another 60 hp with added low end torque, and there would need to be smaller blind spots, specifically the rear and the front pillars. The level of noise suppression was absolutely superb, the transmission shifts beautifully, and the handling still gives me chills. You would also need an in-dash navigation, blue tooth connectivity, and lets forgo the ipod and instead use the bluetooth (or add wireless internet capability to the car) so that it can talk to your home network and can d/l music straight to the car. (That would be freaking awesome).
So, you added those features. Next you need to take an honest look at the competition. Your current competition would be the Mini, the Scion brand, and the Civics (yes you need to take them seriously). You must then ask is our car better than theirs? and does the price reflect the value added and not more?
Ok you’ve done that and have a stellar car, good. Now this is the hardest step to see through. You need to advertise this car, and I’m not talking about tv spots during the super bowl. I’m saying get out to the east coast, get out to the west coast, and get people into the car. Work from the edges of the country inward. You have to actively pursue them. There are people that will never actively pursue an American car company again because the cars from the 80’s are still fresh in their mind (I know them, I work with them every day, they are logical people who don’t recognize their own emotional response to an adverse event, these are engineers businessmen, you get the picture). use the money you would normally use for the tv advertisements to take the cars to restaurants, movie theatres, and the like and ask people to test drive the car for free. Let them experience driving up to these locations in the car. These are the places they are going to want to impress people at. Let them do it without putting the money down first.
I hope this works out for GM. Good Luck
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 10:57 am Wade Bryant said:
When you bought your Astra did you shop other vehicles? Were you confining your search to GM cars?
Good input on your vehicle suggestions/requirements.
Hopefully your absolutely-correct ideas on getting people into our cars without financial commitment will be solved with the GM 60-day Satisfaction Guarantee that was announced yesterday.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 12:37 am Stephen King said:
BMW had small premium about 30 years ago, and Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, VW, Volvo, and Mini all offer small premium cars. It is really a rather large market segment that domestic automobile makers have ignored for the past 25 years and I think a big reason for the massive market share loss the Detroit 3 suffered over that period.
The BMW 335i is the model to follow, that is probably the best small premium car ever made. In Cadillac’s case, small premium should be 180 inches long, 300 horsepower, and every feature currently available on the CTS and STS, plus radar guided cruise control.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 12:47 am Edward Kariithi said:
I own a HHR. I think its a great car save for interior marterials. I hope you could rebuild the HHR with a premium interior and more technology in the future.
Please do not kill it. Its a work of art.
to this comment On October 26, 2009 at 8:25 pm Kenz300 said:
“I own a HHR. I think its a great car save for interior materials.” —— Not exactly a glowing endorsement.
Complaints about the quality of interiors of GM vehicles have been made for years.
They have also been ignored for years.
Quality and Value build brand loyalty.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 12:48 am Dale said:
For some of us, there has never really been a close relationship between large size and premium. I have always considered the BMW 3 series and Audi A4 premium cars, but they are not large, although they are getting larger with each generation. A few keys to the design of a successful small car are good packaging and knowing what can and can not be shrunk. For me, a smaller trunk and less legroom in the rear seat are no problem, but interior width and front seat headroom should not be compromised.
Options are also a necessary part of the premium experience. Things like sports packages, sportier suspensions, xenon headlamps, a larger range of interior and exterior colors, and optional manual transmissions are all necessary in my opinion. These are the reasons why I bought my first BMW 3 series over ten years ago, and it’s why I still consider them to be the best choice among people who really like to drive.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 7:51 am Ralph Panhuyzen said:
A lot of times ‘eco cars’ seems a synonym for ‘geeky automobiles’. Just about only one type of vehicle can overcome this predicament: the Narror Track Vehicle (NTV). It has long been overlooked despite companies like Volvo, Volkswagen and BMW building prototypes. If properly executed, the NTV is able to combine energy-efficiency and distinctive looks, a clever package and safety, comfort and handling. The Space-Efficient Vehicle (SEV) of which drawings were put on display at the Detroit Auto Show, is by far the cleverest. It targets this neglected gray zone between automobile and motorcycle. It doesn’t even need to be expensive or built costly to have a premium aura about it. Let people decide for themselves how luxury they want their SEV to be. Dear People at GM, don’t make the mistake by discussing the goodies… Instead, truly reinvent the automobile.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 9:21 am Rick Sand said:
I don’t believe size has to equate with being premium. BMW, which has a very premium image, probably sells several 3 series for every larger car they produce. GM shook up the market in 1963 with the first Buick Riviera – which was smaller than the LeSabre, Wildcat and Electra 225 – but perceived as way more upscale. In 1976 Bill MItchell’s first Cadillac Seville was much smaller than any other Cadillac – and more expensive than any of them except for Fleetwood 75 Limos. Both of these vehicles were wildly successful, trend setting automobiles that drew people to their respective brands and directly sold a lot of Buicks and Cadillacs besides Rivs and Sevilles.
It becomes a question of content, luxury features, fit and finish and the use of premium materials. Design, of course, is the determining factor. Buick and Cadillac are well on their way back into premium perception with what are some of the best vehicles they have built in many years in terms of their latest vehicles offering all of the above in terms of content, finish etc. Once you have your house in order with bread-and-butter 4 doors and crossover people carriers – it’s time to lay a couple of sexy cars on us. They can be small, but they must be premium and “gotta have”. Where’s a small, attractive Buick convertible that make’s people turn around a look twice? Where’s an expensive, high-tech small Caddy coupe that really stretches the envelope like the ‘67 Eldorado did? They can be hybrids, turbo 3’s or run on the sun but they gotta’ be cool.
GM design must lead the way. Love always begins with a look.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 9:36 am ed said:
Currently, customers for manufactured homes,
. . . can be given a tour of the “Assembly Line” and
. . . watch other peoples houses, being “Built to Order”
. . . from Pre-Manufactured parts.
They can then sit with a sales representative,
. . . who will help them design their very own custom home, on a computer screen.
The “Home Dealer” has “no time or money tied up in inventory,” on their lot,
. . . until the customer makes a payment.
. . . Then the Pre-Manufactured parts request for that customers house
. . . is included with all the other customers orders and
. . . sent to the “Factory,” has “no time or money tied up in unsold goods.”
Can this same “Economy of Scale” Manufacturing and Distribution . . .
. . . be Married with Dealer’s “Build to Order?”
. . . to decrease the number of “Unsold Vehicles” in the pipeline?
What would be the current “Time to Market” of a vehicle today? VS one built on a “Skateboard-Chassis?”
What would be the current “Cost to Market” of a vehicle today? VS one built on a “Skateboard-Chassis?”
What would be the current “Time and Cost to Deliver to the Customer” of a fully assembled vehicle today?
. . . VS one “Flat-Packed to the Dealer” for “Final Assembly with Customizing Options” for the customer.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 9:49 am Ralph Panhuyzen said:
I apologize. My comment seems far more appropriate in response to the ‘eco initiative’. I concentrated too much on the notion of ‘guilt-free pleasure’ of personal freedom and the liberty to move around as such.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 11:03 am Wade Bryant said:
The two topics are related and there are opportunities around the “guilt-free” idea. Thanks for sharing.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 10:40 am Perry said:
Must have “style” inside and out. There should be some “wow” in the look and unique. Any look or features should not be visibily shared in an economy car or with other brands.
- ambiant lighting is now a must
- sound systems should be premium
- quiet interior a must
- seating supportive and luxurious. Seating position for driver should be tall.
- rear passenger view should be open, extra leg room important.
Performance does not need to be at the top but should be much better than average and definitely more than what is found in an economy car (braking, road manners (ride is somewhat firm but still comfortable and acceleration (low to mid 7 sec 0-60)).
Dealership experience for premium brands should be upscale for Buick both in sales and in service.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 12:08 pm sheth said:
Features are key. Look at what’s offered on the Mazda 3 and then go to another level. Many younger people who don’t plan on having kids (or are years away) like the idea of a small luxury car. Backseat and trunk space are not an issue for these people. Design and features are essential though.
HIDs, memory seats, heated seats, remote start, grab handles, nice interior lighting, a complex radio display, USB port and interior stitching should all be included in the small luxury car. Two engines should be offered as well, one for maximum economy and one for performance. The 2.4L DI engine should be used for those who want decent acceleration.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 1:43 pm Kenz300 said:
Hire some designers from APPLE — they know how to attract a customer and built a market for new products.
Quality, innovation and customer satisfaction are key ingredients.
Lure away some top talent from Toyota and Lexus. They seem to put out a much improved product every time they release an update of a model. I do not see the same happening at GM
Maybe you could partner with APPLE on some design issues like electronics?
Bring in Chip Foose to comment on style and performance.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 1:44 pm crby35 said:
I have to agree that a nice hatchback like the Astra would be a good starting place, even the 3 door/5 door option is nice. However, the dash needs to be reworked as well as the engine. If you want to be competitive with Honda, Toyota, Mini etc. your MPGs need to be up closer to 30 City 36 Hwy with a 4-cyl. engine. I think the standard thing people would prefer are power seats/mirrors, heated seats (leather option), cd/stereo with aux input or doc., dual climate control, 16″ alloys (minimum), manual with auto/paddle shift option. Leave the cheap plastics & fabrics behind on the inside.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 2:07 pm Phil Racicot said:
I’d like a small (compact sized) RWD Buick with the ability to seat 4 passengers even if I don’t carry passengers everyday. I would still need some trunk space and passenger space…
As for the proportions, I’d like a small car that doesn’t look too small! I like wide cars with low roofs, long wheelbases and long hoods (with a short front overhang but some space left between the front wheels and the front doors!).
I’d like to have a high performance engine and manual transmission available too…
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 5:38 pm HurstGN said:
To me, I don’t know if I want “small premium”. When the word small is used, I immediately think cramped, uncomfortable, lackluster, and unimpressive. Mating premium to small has to deliver roominess, features, build quality, power, handling, design, and a fun factor to be successful.
Do things that worked in the past, like:
- Roominess – Room for two adults up front. And not just jockeys, but allow room for basketball players. Don’t have it sso cramped that the adults feel they must have an intimate relationship to ride in the car. Have sufficient headroom, elbow room, and legroom. The driver must be happy, focus on this person.
- Features – Make this car with the nice features, like a heads up display, steering wheel controls, heated leather seats, built in navigation/DVD player. Make the goodies available.
- Build Quality – This car should have 0 defects, and when statistics are reviewed, if there is a problem, it’s covered 100% and the customer has the satisfaction level that makes them feel every other car on the road is inferior. Attention to detail is important here.
- Power – Nobody wants some underpowered shoebox. With new fuel economy standards coming, the Stage 1 V8’s of Buick’s past are certainly off the table. But what about a new V6 program. The Grand Nationals of the 80’s were powerful, and still today command lots of respect. So go back to that idea, a V6 with a turbocharger or supercharger that’s a Hemi killer. What could be done with the new Camaro V6 and a turbo? Hrmm, that’s a good start.
- Handling – Don’t cut corners just because 90% of the owners will never see the underside of the car. Most people either don’t want to, or just simply aren’t equipped to work on a car anymore. So they won’t be under it that much…they will still know if it can run the twisties and straight aways with a nimble feeling. Make sure this new car has the handling so all drivers feel secure driving it. Give it handling so it can go to an auto-cross on a weekend.
-Design – The original Riviera was stunning, and still is today. Make the new cars stunning also. The gullwing doors on the Riviera concept car scream of stunning. The lighting effects on the Riviera are also stunning. Make this car stand out in a crowd. Make it special. Even bring back the Special moniker to describe it. The new Camaro is a real looker, make your small premium car a looker as well.
- Fun Factor – Bring ALL these parts together to make a car just plain fun. While I may be in the minority, I still think of a car as far more than something to get me from A to B. I want fun. As Jay Leno put it once, the “immaturity factor” if you will (as Jay took the new Camaro and just lit up the tires). Power, handling, quality…these all add up to putting a smile on the face when driving a car be it down the street to the store, or across town to visit family, or on a trip on a vacation.
This all boils down to one easy way to approach the small premium car. Do you remember when your dad bought a new car and he was proud of it? The neighbors came over to see it. And as a child, you dreamed of one day owning dad’s car when he’d be ready for another new car. Do you remember that feeling? Build a car that inspires that feeling and you’ve got it. Nothing less will do.
These are my wish list items…I wonder how many will come true.
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 6:05 pm Edward said:
There are two ways you could go with the “small premium” concept. You either do the Euro/urban loft chic flavor (i.e. Mini, Audi A3, VW Golf) or the performance-focused compact (BMW 1-series, Mazda RX-8). From what I’ve seen of the 2011 Astra, that would be a PERFECT starting point for a small-premium entry in the U.S. market. I would buy one in a heartbeat if it offered the following features:
- Built-in navigation, Bluetooth and iPod integration
- At least 200 horsepower available.
- Under $28,000, well-equipped
- Manual or dual-clutch sequential transmission available
Right now, the leading contender for my next car is the Mazdaspeed 3. Although I’m waiting to see what the specifications and price point are on the 2011 Ford Focus.
to this comment On September 16, 2009 at 8:51 am Wade Bryant said:
“Urban loft”, “performance compact”, — these are great “high level” starting points for a Small Premium car. This car/vehicle needs to stand out in some premium respect. The two you suggest are good, can you think of any other approches that we could pursue?
Anybody?
to this comment On September 14, 2009 at 9:03 pm David DeLuca said:
Reality being what it is, GM brass is going to hand you some sort of “new global platform,” and they’re going to tell you to make this into your “small premium car.”
I think “premium” also means “special.” Whatever you do, don’t give us badge-engineering, or added chrome, or a different dashboard on an existing Chevy. This car needs to have its own unique interior, instrument panel, exterior sheetmetal, and wheels, at the very least. I’d also suggest an upgraded engine and better handling. You can share the platform and engine basics to save money, but don’t make the Cimmaron mistake again. No one should be able to look at this car and say, “it’s the Buick (or Cadillac) version of the Chevy blah-blah.”
I think a good example of upgrading a car in this manner is the Ford Flex / Lincoln MKT. While I don’t necessarily “like” the MKT, I can appreciate how the two vehicles are different. I think Ford accomplished their goal quite well in differentiating the vehicles, even though they are on the same platform
To me, “premium” means a very solid feel, using very high-quality materials. The car should have all the latest electronic equipment and sound system. There should be a combination of features that make it impressively better than the competition. How about leveraging GM’s experience with magnetic shocks and stability control to allow the driver to select the car’s driving personality? How about using synthetic oil to claim a 20,000 mile oil change? All LED lighting? “Glass cockpit” instrumentation that you can reconfigure using your home PC and a USB thumb drive? Heated and cooled seats as standard?
to this comment On September 15, 2009 at 6:09 am BrianCastillo said:
Maybe I’m throwing a curveball into the mix here, but I’ll toss this idea out for discussion…
There have been several comments regarding suspensions, ride experience, and engine power. Speaking purely from an engineering perspective, if you imagine:
- take an somewhat pedestrian small car like a Chevy Cobalt, Ford Focus, or Honda Civic
- throw in a 250 horsepower engine and a six-speed automatic
- ditch the entry-car suspension and replace with premium strut front and multi-link independent rear
- add recaro or similar premium seats
- add Navigation, bluetooth, USB, and all the other electronic trimmings
- beef up the acoustic insulation to quiet down the ride
- add optional all-wheel-drive
In your mind, would this be a “premium car”, or just a non-premium car with a lot of extra content?
Would sharing the underpinnings with a non-premium car sabotage the whole idea, or (since you don’t really see the underside of the car) would you not care?
Would this be a “genuine” sort of premium product, or would you view it simply as a down-scaled version of today’s existing premium cars?
I’m tossing this idea out just as one example of what a “premium small” might be to me…I’m interested to hear what everybody else thinks.
(Disclaimer / Truth-in-Posting Statement: I’m a GM engineer, but speaking on my own behalf.)
to this comment On September 15, 2009 at 6:58 pm ed said:
In your mind, would this be a “premium car?”
Some may consider this a “premium car,”
I think it’s “displaying a high-consumption lifestyle” of “Wants,”
. . . that loses value as soon as it’s driven off the Dealers lot and
. . . every year it’s owned.
—————————————————————————–
In 1996 I bought a brand new Saturn SL,
. . . it gets 35MPG city, 40MPG Highway.
The price of gasoline has gone up over the years, and
. . . I still get 35MPG city, 40MPG Highway
. . . saving me more money each year.
I have a need for hauling things, and
. . . tow a light trailer,
. . . saving me even more money.
When it snows, I attach a light weight plastic “V-shaped” plow
. . . to clear out the driveway in minuets,
. . . saving me the cost of a snowblower and maintenance.
When an “Ice Storm” knocked out power in the whole state for a week,
. . . attaching an “Inverter” to the car,
. . . allowed basic electricity to our home
. . . saving the cost of a generator.
A “Premium car”can provide for much more of your “Needs”
. . . while saving money, thus becoming an “appreciable asset.”
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 11:50 am BrianCastillo said:
That’s awesome about your Saturn. I still have the same truck I had twenty years ago, and I share your enthusiasm – it still works, and it gets cheaper every year!
to this comment On September 21, 2009 at 1:08 am peteMT said:
I think in terms of reworking an existing platform and adding premium features – that would simply be something with added options, or an ‘upscale’ trim level. But, and this is key, only if the vehicle has the same name as, and is visually identifiable as, the non-upscale version. I don’t think the vast majority of buyers care what the platform is underneath… now if you were to ‘upscale’ an existing model but completely change the appearance and give it a new name – well, now you are on to something.
The Cobalt SS is a great example of what can be done, and of ‘perception’. Yes, it’s a Cobalt, everyone knows that; but when driven, reviewed, tested, etc. it’s clear that it’s so much more. GM can make a Cobalt SS but a Cobalt ‘premium’ just might not work.
I just don’t think a starter car with added nicer features is truly ‘premium.’ It makes me think of what GM had in the 1960’s – Biscayne, Bel Air, Impala, Caprice. I had a few of these. The Caprice was nicer in a lot of ways, but wasn’t premium – certainly not the car a ‘68 Cadillac was.
And that’s fine – that’s the way it should be. I don’t think there should even *be* a premium Chevrolet model. That’s not the mission of Chevrolet. However, it is of Buick, and Cadillac… the problem you’ll have is taking a common platform and making it unique and premium enough to differentiate between Buick and Cadillac. Perhaps the Cadillac should be more powerful, quieter, offer a ‘V’ version, with even higher quality interior and leather.
One corner that most auto manufacturers have painted themselves into is the concept of ‘basic’. Even the most basic car is very well equipped compared with 20 years ago. Power windows, AC, ABS, airbags… even stability control is becoming standard, to say nothing of the engineering and quality improvements. The bar for premium is now set very high.
What do I consider premium? What would I look for if shopping for a premium compact?
First, I’d look at the exterior design. Is it coherent, unique, fluid, and thoughtful? The new Enclave is very close. The new Lacrosse is there. The Malibu is good. The 2010 Mustang has it. The Taurus is close. Honda, Toyota and Subaru are strange again, like they were in the 70’s, and seem incoherent to me. The CTS is there and beyond. Strangely shaped and located panel gaps (such as those between the body and the front and rear fascia panels) really detract, as do ‘afterthought’ rectangular reflectors on modern designs. Are panel gaps even? And the paint. Premium to me means NO orange peel. I know it can be done, I see it on current non-premium cars. When I see orange peel on a Cadillac, I shake my head. And color – premium cars should have unique colors – not just renamed versions of paint colors on other divisions.
Second, the interior. The design should, again, be coherent and ‘fit’ with the exterior of the car. Make sure the fonts on nameplates and switches and radios and displays all match! I don’t want to see screws or fastener covers or feel plastic flashings at edges and joints. The interior pieces and panels should be solid and not flexible and thin sounding when rapped with a knuckle. Rattles are out of the question of course. Switches should have a solid, damped, tactile feel to them. The seats should be more adjustable than in basic vehicles and should offer truly premium cloth as an option in addition to truly premium leather. There should be more color options and combinations available as well, not just gray, black, and tan. How about red, burgundy, or dark blue? The brick in the Malibu is terrific! And of course a premium sound system should be offered.
Third, the driving experience. I would expect strong acceleration, BMW handling, no wind noise, minimal road noise, and sufficient engine noise. Notice I didn’t say ‘no engine noise’. This is one area where something is better than nothing. Perhaps as an option some system can be added to either damp engine sound…or let it into the cabin in some way. The Mustang has an additional tube that brings sound into the cabin. Also, premium to me means that one could drive the car for 14 hours straight and not feel stiff at the end of the drive. This too can be done – I experienced it in, of all vehicles, the current Impala. Twice. Incredible.
Premium means premium finishes, interior materials, solidity, driving experience, and foremost, quality.
I think this can be done. I think it’s a good idea. Buick and Cadillac are the brands. If GM can deliver a vehicle like this that is smaller and gives up nothing, while gaining handling and mpg’s, I think they’ll sell very well.
to this comment On October 26, 2009 at 12:58 am Jean-Paul Beaugrand said:
Premium:
–adjective
a. of exceptional quality or greater value than others of its kind; superior: e.g., a wine made of premium grapes.
b. of higher price or cost.
—Idiom
“at a premium,”
a. at an unusually high price.
b. in short supply; in demand: “Housing in that area is at a premium.”
Domestic car companies historically have a policy of overproducing product in relation to demand. Something that’s overproduced is not a “premium product.”
“Small Premium” should be of much higher quality, have the best warranty and best customer service in the industry, and be in shorter supply than the ordinary.
to this comment On September 15, 2009 at 10:24 am Marc300yard said:
Premium, whether large or small, is conveyed to the driver and passengers through the tactile sensations they experience in the repeated use of the vehicle. Repeated use is the key. If an owner can still think in 4 years, how much they like the heft, movement, and clicking sensation of the turn signal stalk, then they perceive that as permium. Sound deadening is critical, as is the ergonomic design of all the switch gear and dashboard controls. Sweating the details is premium. My new 2010 Equinox LTZ has side view mirrors that automatically aim down when I shift into reverse. Premium. However, they never return to the exact position they were set to previously, and I have to readjust them. Not premium. My memory seats can be configured to move down and back when exiting, and will return to the saved position when my key fob is used to unlock the door. To me that was premium when my father bought one of the first Infiniti Q45’s around 15 years ago, and if had a similar feature. It’s not important how long ago it was. That feature struck me as premium then, and now that I have it in my vehicle, I feel like I have moved upscale.
No tinny sounds of thin doors closing, plenty of engine torque, quiet, solid (almost pleasing) tactile sensations, and just enough technology to brag about. That’s what premium is to me.
to this comment On September 16, 2009 at 9:00 am Wade Bryant said:
Thanks for the comments about tactile quality. It is one of those things that doesn’t attract attention at an auto show, but makes a huge difference to the customer, especially after they’ve owned the car for a while.
I’m happy to hear you bought an Equinox. I was working on the interior before I moved to Advanced Design and I’m excited to see them on the road now.
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 3:18 am PhilR said:
Yes, things like the feel of the turn signal stalk are important. I was bothered everytime I used it in my 1991 Buick Park Avenue Ultra. The lever felt cheap and it seemed like it was about to break everytime I used it. The lane change feature was not easy to use as sometimes the flashers wouldn’t blink until the stalk locked in flashing position… The wiper and cruise control switches which were also mounted on that stalk weren’t nice to operate either and the printed indications on them disappeared quickly! Even worse the chrome was peeling from the plastic washer switch (also on the turn signal stalk!) which was not only an eyesore but also not nice to touch. Just the same could be said about the power seat and window switches or the lock buttons which were all made of chromed plastic and peeling (and everything sounded cheap and loose!). Toyota made things much better. My current old Toyota 4×4 SR5 truck of the same vintage was much cheaper to buy when new but it’s accessories are much nicer to use (turn signal, switches for power options, the noise of the door lock actuators, etc.) and they all still work today (including the A/C and the power antenna!). No wonder why the resale value of these Toyotas is much better!
Other bothering things I experienced in some GM cars are the flasher unit located in an odd location like in the late nineties Malibu (the noise seemed to come from the top of the dashboard on the passenger side, weird and annoying…). Cheap material used for armrests, door panels which seem loose, easy to tear and hard to clean, sagging foam-backed cloth headliners, seats that are covered with cheap material, sometimes with bent backrests. Non locking fuel doors on many models, automatic trunk pull down hooks which are so poorly designed that they easy to break, they feel loose and cheap even when new and that are totally useless! I prefer the sound of a trunk door that closes tight without ratteling noises and problems of the trunk pull down feature!
And rattles, lots of them, a small but annoying noise coming from the small lens inside the rearview mirror for the automatic dimming feature, idiot lights turning on for no reason other than a bad sensor like: low coolant (with coolant level OK!), ABS, service engine soon, change oil soon (even after being reset!)… All these things must be avoided! A tachmeter that works intermittently, a heated windshield that worked for just 3 years, after, the 900$ controle module was completely desintegrated by corrosion… Clunking sounds in the front suspension, a transmission that was replaced 3 times at the dealer, noisy wheel bearings when the car barely has 20,000 miles, ticking noise coming from the intake manifold (and not even a plastic one!)… Noisy fan motors, bad (and expensive) fan speed controle modules (for automatic climate control). Wipers that won’t turn off or won’t return to their park position… Accessories that stop working because of wires joints that corrode on the floor… A vehicle with all these problems might still work but it’s an annoyance to drive one.
to this comment On September 15, 2009 at 10:13 pm 6speed said:
Ah, Premium small cars. When I think of Premium Small, here are the vehicles that come to mind: first and foremost, the Mini Cooper. The VW GTI. Mazda3. Currently available in Europe, the Fiat 500.
Premium small cars are vehicles that people aspire to despite their lack of size (perceived as a requirement here in the States), or highline badge. Premium small cars do NOT rely on gimmicks like oversized wheels, huge grilles, or extra-large heaps of chrome. To me, premium does not necessarily mean “luxury”, but I think that’s the perception.
In the case of the Mini, an instantly recognizable exterior design, with some uniqueness (quirkiness?) carried over in to the interior. Throw in a huge dollop of fun-to-drive, and that’s what makes it Premium. People aspire to this vehicle.
As for the GTI, you get practicality (huge interior volume) and understated sportiness. Just as important, VW has found a way to pack premium technologies into the car. Note the DSG gearbox…class-exclusive. This innovative transmission also achieves BETTER performance and fuel economy than the manual trans…now THAT’S premium. A high “fun-to-drive” factor is also included as standard equipment. Gobs of chrome and “hey, look at me!” styling are not needed, nor welcome.
With the Mazda3, this car advances the compact with segment-firsts such as power seats (I believe memory is available as well?). So Mazda is offering buyers who are moving “down” several of the features they are used to, or more importantly, not willing to give up with downsizing.
I’ve driven the all the above cars (except the Fiat). I can tell you that they didn’t waste time trying for a “library quiet” interior, or blingy exterior, they know those aren’t selling points at this price. That stuff is for the larger, more “traditional” luxury cars. The focus is on offering technology, relevant features, and responsive handling & ride characteristics. I have owned a couple Acura Integras in the past. That car was considered Premium, even though it had one of the biggest “taboos” in the U.S. market at the time–a hatchback. What it delivered was great ride and handling, an upscale look (without being over-the-top), and lots of advanced features for the day–a free-revving engine, smooth transmission, double-wishbone suspension, supportive seats, premium sound, etc.
Market your product and it’s “premiumness”. Messaging is important–look at Ford’s marketing of EcoBoost. While we all know that EcoBoost translates to “last one on the market with DI-turbo”, people now have the perception that this is something new.
Not to beat a dead horse, but look at Apple products. Simplified design. Ease of use. Leading-edge technology. Apple is considered premium amongst it’s competitors. A Premium small car should be no different.
to this comment On September 16, 2009 at 4:10 pm tom said:
have 09 cobalt by chevy motortrend say about 2010 wait for cruz by chevy meaning my cobalt is obslete?
to this comment On September 16, 2009 at 5:20 pm ed said:
“Would sharing the underpinnings with a non-premium car sabotage the whole idea,
. . . or (since you don’t really see the underside of the car) would you not care?”
Sharing the underpinnings, like your Skateboard-Chassis is a terrific idea!
. . . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKI8hEPDjh8
Changing the “Drive-By-Wire” software
. . . to make the steering, brakes, suspensions, ride experience, and
. . . engine power to suit your needs.
Like “Economy Stop & Go City driving”
. . . to “Fast highway commuter driving”
. . . to “Powerful trailer hauling”
. . . in the same car, the same day as the need presents itself.
The more software applications you can create that customers “Need” or “Want”,
. . . the more you can sell and download. (like Apple sells Music, Movies, etc.)
Replace the Hydrogen with a “leased” swappable battery and
. . . make money on every mile all customers drive,
. . . it’s like finding oil in your back yard. (without the pollution)
to this comment On September 16, 2009 at 6:07 pm Matt Glowacki said:
When I think premium I have no preconceived notion of size, capacity, function or style. Doesn’t have to have all the latest whiz bang gadgets. It can’t be an up-optioned vehicle built from the parts bin either – I’m leaning more toward something at the sensory level. Not necessarily expensive and lavish just attention to details. You can’t just bolt on this type of refinement, it has to be bred in.
Sound – How do the doors/hood/trunk sound when I open/close them? What noises are made from activating controls within the car? i.e. whiring power seat/power window motors, door chimes, 4-way flashers, etc..? Is the engine exhaust note pleasant without being over bearing? Do I hear tire flop, road texture, and wind noises while in motion?
Smell – when I kick on the AC on a humid day does it blow the customary shot of musty air for the first 30 seconds? Does it smell like degassing plastic every time I jump in it on a hot sunny day or kick on the heater? Do I smell the Diesel burning behemoth ahead of me on the freeway?
Feel – Does the AC blast me in the face when I turn it on or is more diffused? Do I feel cool and comfortable all over or cold on my chest/face and hot on my back/behind and visa versa? Does the brake peddle feel mushy under hard braking? Is the gas peddle stiff and notchy? Does the steering wheel give good feedback (and comfortable to grip) or is it vague? Does the seat feel as good at hour 4 of a road trip as it did in the first 10 minutes? Do driver contact points feel soft, warm and inviting? Does the suspension feel tight and responsive without being harsh? Are the controls laid out intuitively so that I don’t have to visually hunt for a specific control?
Sight – Does the interior lighting blind me when I turn it on? Does it provide enough light so that I can find the house keys I dropped on my way home at night? Does the hood, windshield and interior surfaces refract light in a way that distracts me visually? Do I have clear line of sight all the way around or do I have a massive A/B/C pillars blocking my view? Do the headlights provide adequate forward and peripheral lighting without blinding oncoming traffic?
Taste – um… I got nothin!
In a nutshell, my definition of premium means that I spend less time observing the distractions and quirks and more time enjoying the driving experience.
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 12:47 pm PhilR said:
A pillars are huge on many newer cars, they might increase the passive safety a bit (in case of a rollover or to allow more room for side impact airbags?) but they are obstruding the vision of the driver which isn’t good… The same is true about B pillars. I currently have Buicks (a hardtop coupe and two hardtop sedans) that have no B pillars, they offer greater visibility and from my past experience, they are still quite resistant to big side impacts (10 years ago, I had a high speed side collision with my ‘68 Wildcat hardtop sedan and the side doors, the roof and rear quarter were destroyed but the center post hasn’t even moved!
And HARDTOPS LOOK PREMIUM. I wish there would be new hardtop coupes and hardtop sedans at Buick. Buick was the first manufacturer to offer hardtop coupes on the ‘49 Roadmaster Riviera and the first manufacturer to offer hardtop sedans in ‘55 (on the smaller series Special Riviera and Century Riviera). It should do it again!
I don’t like cars with center posts! And GM made quite a few hardtop prototypes recently but none reached production (the 2000 LaCrosse, the Cadillac Sixteen, the Camaro…).
With premium materials and modern technology, it’s possible to make pilarless hardtops, even with the current rollover standards.
to this comment On September 16, 2009 at 6:52 pm MikeDWhite said:
For me, the test of a premium small car is something simple. Can you drive it for several hours on the interstate without getting uncomfortable or tired? I somewhat reluctantly traded up for a larger car a few years ago when I got tired of all the interstate driving.
The keys to long haul comfort are:
Seats: need to be firm, I also find a good headrest helps on long drives.
Roominess: packaging a roomy interior into small car is actually quite easy when you employ a tall roofline and cab forward proportions. Sadly, the Cobalt is one of the least space efficient cars on the market.
Noise/Vibration/Harshness: Another are where small cars are already improving greatly. I hear that small engines are smoother than large ones. Something to look into if it dosen’t get in the way of other objectives.
Ride: Go for the RIGHT ride/handling balance, not just what fits the price point.
I think the main thing holding small cars back is that they are being built to a price. If there was a Cobalt size car with Malibu-level refinement I’d pay Malibu dollars. Not sure if anyone else would but this is what the market needs to learn. Size does not play much of a role in determining the overall cost of the vehicle.
to this comment On September 16, 2009 at 10:31 pm aaltobartok said:
Premium: make it look and feel different.
How about a solstice/sky platform Buick coupe & sedan with rear or awd, 4-cyl turbo engines, and sophisticated interiors? I’d buy one…
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 9:59 am TerryB. said:
I wonder if there isn’t a negative connotation associated with the word, ‘Small’?
Would a better approach to the concept be, ‘Personal Premium’?
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 10:22 am ed said:
GM’s Hydrogen proponent Larry Burns, vice president of research, development and strategic planning at GM
http://green.autoblog.com/2009/09/16/chat-with-retiring-gm-research-vp-larry-burns-today-at-3pm-edt/
. . . How will his retirement effect GM?
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 10:34 am Ron said:
My two cents:
From the outside, I often find GM headlights look cheap. Lights like those on BMWs or Mazda 3s often look quite classy (not sure why, but they do). The grille is super important. It has to look sophisticated, yet simple – something along the lines of the current grille of the Infiniti G37 (based on a sword blade). When I look for premium I look for a few sharp edges combined with smooth curves and nice paint! Look to VW, BMW or Infiniti for what I mean (esp. with regard to their ultraglossy paint). The interior in most GM cars is fairly premium these days, but I’d like to see colour LCD screens that are bright and simple (like in the Volt). My main problem with GM premium cars is typically the seats. They’re just NOT premium enough, with the exception of the CTS. Please just hire some external company to make your seats. Sit in a Volvo and compare both the appearance and comfort. A Volvo even has different types/textures of leather within the same seat (and not just smooth vs perforated). You should create a seat with a company like Ekornes and make a nice seat that someone can enjoy sitting in. And it should be adjustable! This includes lumbar support and thigh support (by extending the seat). Ultimately these are all pretty simple things that one can find in other premium cars (just check out the new Maxima – how can they give us all that for such a low price? It should put GM to shame…). But, I’m going to conclude this rant saying that these types of advances should extend not only to GM’s premium cars that most people cannot afford, but to their cheap entry-level sedans and coupes. Saying that a Camaro SS can compete with an Infiniti G37 or Nissan 370Z is simply not true. Maybe it drives fast, but the interior and seats cannot compare. Pass it on! I want to be proud to own a GM and be able to show it off without people telling me how they can get better for cheaper from the competition. Good luck!
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 10:14 pm GARRETT said:
I totally agree. GM headlights do often look very cheap. My guess is because they are. How come whenever I see a last gen Yukon (or its platform partners) one of their driving lights is alway out?
MORE LEDs MORE LEDs MORE LEDs MORE LEDs MORE LEDs MORE LEDs MORE LEDs
to this comment On October 21, 2009 at 1:44 pm Kenz300 said:
Quality and Value are what is needed.
Cheap looking and performing is not.
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 11:17 am DaleEarnhardtChevy said:
Everyday we see on the web and on the news, how small and economical is all the rage. But I have to say that these messages are very wrong. Our dealership is located in a rural area (like the majority of America) and people here do not want to be crammed in tiny cars with no room or power. Personally I like the idea of the small premium, but this sentiment isn’t reflected by our sales, as I am sure GM can attest with its overall sales. This small, ecological movement is great for Europe or larger cities here in the USA. But for the large majority of Americans driving open roads, big and powerful is still greatly desired. So I think the whole small sentiment, although trendy, is very out of touch with the majority of car buyers. Why not pursue an affordable premium option instead of a small premium. Or maybe an ecological premium. Why can’t a larger car, or more precisely truck/suv be ecological and economical. Give the customers what they want, a Tahoe, Silverado, etc. that is very affordable as well as good to the enviroment. Instead of reinventing the wheel, lets fix the wheels we have first.
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 1:46 pm mrycar said:
Small Premium, very obtainable. Provide a compelling appearance that doesn’t sacrifice. Take the interior to the extreme. Opulent, high tech, sporty, or other theme related interiors, promote pride and raise the norm. Go to the powertrain, make it either visible or invisible based on which premium theme you are seeking. Question whether the plastic cladding of the engine compartment really makes it premium. Provide power to a class that wants it. Provide smooth acceleration to others.
Make the components something that someone tells a friend about. Make the components something someone blogs about. Do not over complicate things though, as premium and complicated do not go well together.
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 2:22 pm Charles LeFranc said:
What we are trying to do with the buick small premium project is to show the intent to refresh the buick brand. We want to push buick closer to the competion.
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 10:16 pm GARRETT said:
Then give us more rebadged Opels.
Thanks
GARRETT
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 3:00 pm Chief said:
New to site. Having scanned the posts above, wish to start by weighing in on a few topics mentioned.
RWD – in San Diego, great. I live in Michigan and want nothing to do with it.
Opel – Is it really that great of a car in Europe? If so, and you want to bring them here, please do not just paste the tired, same-old, front ends on them (ala Pontiac)
Manual Shift – First let me say that I think the “Manumatic ” is the biggest waste of time, $, and tecnology in cars today. As for manuals, I have one in my “toy” (88 Fiero GT) and that’s where they belong. Love it as such but if they disappeared from the mainstream I would completely understand and not miss them.
Fuel economy – Favorite design on the road today is the CTS but, wouldn’t buy one. 17 MPG just doesn’t get it. My next vehicle no matter what class must get 20 MPG City on regular – Period. My 1999 Lexus RX300 has given me 18 – 19 city since new. I won’t settle for less after 10 years of ‘innovations and advanced engineering’ all geared toward “improved” economy.
“Premium” – Forget the ad tags, give me quality, reliability and a company that will stand behind the vehicle over the long term (and force their dealers to do the same). Much of the amenities mentioned are givens today. The big buzz now is the “techno” gadgets. Personnally I do not wish to live in my car, make it a traveling entertainment mecca or mobile office. To those that do, more power to ya, just make it all optional.
At the time I bought my 05 Scion, the list of standard features read like that of a near luxury sedan and in some cases better, offering features either optional or nonexistent on vehicles costing more than twice as much. i.e. it had dual (coupe) one-touch up & down power windows, an item not even available on a $50k Cadillac at the time. That should never happen to a Cadillac. Other examples, std tire pressure monitor, sunroof, panaramic roof…all for $17k. Keep an eye on the competition.
Design – Not every model of a brand must have the identical front end. Scion’s 3 models have only the logo in common and, sakes alive, they’re still recognizable as Scions! Unchain the design staff and get rid of the cookie-cutter, across the brand cloning.
Premium to me means quality and reliability in design and function. There aren’t as many “enthusiasts” out there as the car mags (and letter writers) would have you believe. A logical balance of performance, safety, economy and comfort + premium.
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 3:33 pm DM3 said:
There are two cars I can think of off the top of my head that I would consider “Small premium.” One is available in the US, the other sort of is already. The first is the MINI Cooper. It’s obviously small, and has a strong focus to the sporty side. Incredible handling for a front driver, almost like a go-kart for grownups to legally use in traffic. It has some gizmos and gadgets installed, but mainly the car is for fun, with just enough practicality built in for everyday use. The second is the European trim levels for the Astra. Our US spec version sold by Saturn seems to be heavily decontented from it’s Opel and Vauxhaul counterparts according to many people who have driven them in Europe or the UK. Perhaps that was to help make the car less expensive, but it did the car no favors. Lack of models such as the twin top, lack of features, lack of the VXR sports version all combined to make the Saturn Astra rather unremarkable. Even if it had been sold as a proper sedan and coupe I don’t think it would have made much of a difference. The car was doing without what made it special. It’s like taking a Buick Enclave and making a spartan, completely utilitarian version of it. It would still work perfectly well, but it would lose what makes it a Buick and sets it above the mainstream Chevrolets.
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 6:07 pm ed said:
From an engineering perspective, would this be a “Premium” motor?
http://kron1.eng.ox.ac.uk/media/papers/Woolmer_paper_2007a.pdf
to this comment On September 18, 2009 at 2:37 pm ed said:
“Adding to the excitement, Treasury-appointed GM Chairman Edward “I Don’t Know Much About Cars” Whitacre
. . . has reportedly made it clear
. . . more executive heads will roll
. . . if they don’t show good financial results in short time.
The Detroit News reports that
. . . 47-year-old Chief Financial Officer Ray Young is on his way out.
. . . Even Henderson . . . is said to be on the bubble.
http://blogs.motortrend.com/6575678/corporate/at-gm-the-fun-is-just-beginning/index.html
to this comment On September 17, 2009 at 10:05 pm kevzter said:
I agree with the comments about the tactile feel of the switchgear. This is an area the GM completely overlooked for years. I have an ‘09 CTS and while it is much better than earlier GM efforts, there is still room for improvement (the window switches come to mine). I also agree that premium need not be luxury, it can be sporty as well. I agree that the BMW 3er is the benchmark but better value would also be appreciated as BMW prices these days are just offensive!
Getting back to tactile sensations, pay attention to things like how the door feels and sounds when it closes. Mercedes used to be the master of this. Shutting the door on my mother’s early 90’s 190 felt as solid and imposing as bank vault. It just makes the car FEEL so well made even if only on a subliminal level.
I would also love to have bespoke options like BMW’s Individual program in Europe. It would be great to be able to choose my paint color, leather, wheels, etc… and be able to fine tune my options with microscopic precision. I don’t like the trend these days of having to spring for a 10k option package just to get Nav. People like to customize their cars anyway but rarely do it well. I think many people would pay extra to get a customized look right from the factory. Just make sure a designer OK’s the order, otherwise you might end up with some hideous results that could reflect badly on the car.
It should also be a technological tour-de-force. Re-think the wiring harness technology that goes back to the beginning of time and use an expandable bus with the ability to swap, upgrade and add components. See my comments in the Bare Essentials car forum.
to this comment On September 18, 2009 at 2:49 am DM3 said:
I just thought I’d put my “Captain obvious” hat back on and site a few examples of mainstream vs premium.
VW and Audi are a great example. The VW’s are mostly mainstream. The Golf (Rabbit), the New Beetle and Jetta are the typical mainstream offerings from VW. Nice but nothing to write home about. Now Audi has taken that same basic platform and made some huge differences. The A4, A4 and TT are words apart in sophistication and features. The same goes for comparing the Toureg with the Q7.
Closer to home, Ford seems to have figured out the premium thing. The Lincoln MKZ is far and away nicer and more feature laden than the Fusion. Same goes for the MKX vs the Edge though those two seem to be a bit to close to each other in the marketplace in my opinion. One can option an Edge to nearly the same level as an MKX.
Even at GM there is defined lines of Premium over mainstream. Enclave vs Traverse, the new LaCrosse vs the Malibu. The premium car in each case offers something that other, more mainstream cars do not. Be it handling, luxury or a combination of the two. The premium car doesn’t even need to be expensive either. The MINIs typically sell in the low to mid $20,000 range. Or roughly the price of a typical HHR SS.
to this comment On September 21, 2009 at 10:11 am mnmavrik said:
there was a comment made a while ago that i think you should really fix on as an image of what a small premium car should be tailored to.
a suit.
i think all the things that make a fine suit should be found in a small premium. it needs to be lightweight, with a classic look that still finds some modern flairs. fine materials should not be compromised with stitching to match. it could span both the new buick and cadillac. the buick could be tailored more towards comfort where as the cadillac could be more bold and have an athletic side. i’m not sure how much cadillac does this, but multiple and distinct (but not too many, 2-3) settings for shift points and suspension could used so that people can feel like they are truly using the vehicle for their likes. it really needs to focus on one area to pursue without sacrificing too much of its other qualities. all vehicles have pros/cons, but cons can be accepted if there is a definite direction the car was meant to be taken. the buick can be allowed to have some body roll if the ride is sublime and the cadillac can be allowed to have some less than class-leading fuel economy if the power is key.
last comparison to a suit. yes everyone around you sees the outside, but you spend most of your time on the inside. make sure it is comfortable and well thought out. i feel that many vehicles have way too cluttered of center counsels (cough honda). combine functions logically and impress people with its ease of use. have the buttons light up more when a hand is near it or something. it shouldn’t be gimmicky but it should be progressive.
to this comment On September 21, 2009 at 11:40 pm Vikingsoftpaw said:
Putting all of the electronic Foo-Foo is all fine and well. One thing must be realized, GM is not known for producing premium luxury cars. Yes Caddys and Buicks are very nice but not in the same class as Mercedes and and BMW or Lexis. Nor would people pay the extra tens of thousand for them. The underpinnings are every thing, still mass produced corporate chassis. I understand the idea well, President Obama spoke of the need for the American people to get used to paying more for smaller cars. People will pay $40K for a truck not for a loaded Lacrosse for Taurus SHO no matter how much electronic Foo-Foo is stuffed into them.
to this comment On January 11, 2010 at 11:29 am bd said:
Hate to burst your bubble. The Mercs in Europe were Taxis in Colgne- ver bland. They and the BMWer were also driven by the blings, the gold chains and like. Very trashy- could not get over that picture. Reminded me of the ghetto here.
We drove one witha DIesel- what a cheesy dog.They only send the premium stuff here.
to this comment On September 22, 2009 at 12:41 pm Chief said:
I keep reading and hearing how Opel should be the salvation for GM. Opel sells far less than 2 million cars a year and for all of my automotive “ear-to-the-ground” efforts, I do not notice their vehicles on any “Best of” or Top Ten” lists.
Aren’t the Saturns based on Opels? How well is that working out? Saturn has one foot in the grave and the walls are closing in fast. I might also remind you of the failed notion that Holden was going to save Pontiac starting with the GTO. How did that one turn out?
My point is simply that there is no magic bullet. Opel will probaly not survive without GM but, GM can survive without Opel. Rebadging (as has been suggested here and elsewhere) is not the answer. In fact, I think it is the first step to total failure.
When I think “Premium” I do not think “Rebadging”. I want new, innovative, first of or one of a kind. I want to feel like someone put some effort into trying to impress me rather than merely slapping the Buick grill onto a 5 year old Opel.
“Small Premium” is risky territory. It will take generations for Americans to shift into what is defined as small vehicles. Why do you think most models seem to grow with each new generation? Like the term or not, mid-size is the sweet spot.
to this comment On September 22, 2009 at 12:45 pm DM3 said:
mnmavrik, The center consoles of many BMW’s are a bit more cluttered than Honda, plus of course, that mess they call i-drive only makes it worse. It basically moved a lot of the clutter from physical buttons to a screen. Now it’s not only cluttered, but confusing, and difficult to use as well.
to this comment On September 23, 2009 at 9:33 am Chris Mattson said:
Cars – especially premium ones aren’t just people movers; here’s some ideas/suggestions on premium content:
1) Color LCD screen(s) for your dash. Get rid of the electro-mechanical gauge-cluster. A $50 portable media player has them – don’t tell me they can’t be affordably done for a $20k+ auto.
2) Flash memory or a hard drive for the vehicle to store music, settings and photos.
3) Wireless connectivity to the car. You should be able to wirelessly connect to your car and:
a. Transfer music to/from your car’s harddrive
b. Change your dash preferences:
1. what type of info is displayed–and where
2. colors
3. skins
4. pictures
c. Change settings on your car:
1. generic settings like: lights blick/horn sounds when locking/unlocking, etc
2. tuning settings. Why have somebody ‘tune’ my car when I can connect to my car and simply change performance from ‘best gas mileage’ to ‘best performance’ (or a scale somewhere in-between)
d. Setup a 3g connection for your car to a 3G network of your chosing and pick up information like traffic/weather/news.
e. Calendar w/reminders – integratation with: google, outlook, and/or phone calendars? If the car’s got a hard-drive and a wireless connection, whose to say a user couldn’t ‘install a device driver’ that supports integration with the various devices of their choosing?
A feature-rich, tech-savy car like this would certainly peak the interest of a lower-age group that probably wouldn’t consider a present-day Buick product.
to this comment On September 23, 2009 at 5:16 pm PontiacNick said:
I was on LeftLane News just a few moments ago and saw some of the sketches/images. I rather like the coupe concepts. The side view/profile of a coupe like vehicle with some Inifiniti overtones is quite fetching. The nose needs work. I also liked the overhead view of the coupe like design. It was close to the end of the series. Smaller hips are needed though. The drawings/renderings showed just a touch too much. Reduce by about 20% and that would be sweet. The interiors didn’t do it for me. Too dark and woody.
Sketch/image 3 also had some potential. It appeared to be a 3 door. If Buick wants to go for a hot hatch type of vehicle, may I suggest that you have a look at the Alfa Romeo Brera? It is quite a neat vehicle but unfortunately it has the Alfa face which is just too busy and outdated.
There! My first .02 worth!
to this comment On September 23, 2009 at 8:23 pm fredyc said:
Can say an important thing luxury cars have to offer is exclusivity. The exclusivity can be offered through many ways. The most important think is the brand and the associated level of execution.
Another way could be exaggeration. Bugatti Veyron is The example. I imagine a car the size of Mini, having 300 hp, or extreme fuel efficiency better than hp, or 100% recyclable or the interior refinement of a Rolls Royce Phantom. But not any kind of exaggeration. Design exaggeration should not replace refinement – well, this is a matter of taste.
Other way would be somewhat related to exaggeration – quirky, weird characteristics. A predominant weird\distinctive characteristic. Like the Gull-wing doors of Mercedes SLS.
to this comment On September 24, 2009 at 6:21 am Frank Bowman said:
I’m a GM owner and have been since the 80’s and a Buick fan in particular. I’ve owned an 81 and 90 Century, an 82 and 90 Regal and a 95 Riviera which was my favorite which I only gave up three years ago because I wanted an SUV. I am in my 40’s and I love cars so when I saw on Leftlane news that you are finally considering a premium small car I had to comment. Any car that wears the Buick nameplate should be a stylish feature packed vehicle that is roomy and quick, I’m no fan of cars with a useless backseat. Even if you want to target the youth market it would be nice if their friends could tag along. All the newest features mp3 and bluetooth connectivity, ambient lighting, lane departure and blind spot warning etc. features like are found in the new LaCrosse scaled down but not skimped on, look at what Kia is offering in the Forte. The handling must be crisp but compliant no wallowing or floating (I know we’re past that.) my Riviera had good handling which got better with a good set of rims and Pirelli’s. I loved the Riviera concept and like the styling direction you are taking. Can’t wait to see how it turns out.
to this comment On September 24, 2009 at 4:19 pm MTUH3 said:
I have to admit, first that came to mind is the Cadillac Catera… and we know how that turned out.
In my opinion, a luxery or premium vehicle should have the content I want (speed, agility, sound system, accessories, and overall comfort, focus being on quiet interior) the size of the vehicle should depend on the ability to package all these requirements. I am not sold on a large number of “luxery / premium” owners really feeling guilty about what they drive or the resources they use. I see it more as a fad…
to this comment On October 21, 2009 at 1:42 pm Kenz300 said:
Anyone know the saying “lipstick on a pig”
It is still a pig.
to this comment On September 25, 2009 at 3:59 am dfschim said:
Buick used to have small premium cars, the Skyhawk is the best known. Before the Skyhawk the Apollo hatchback fired my imagination, that car switched its name to Skylark to match the Skyhawk.
Those cars were hatchbacks, but they didn’t look like small station wagons or VW Golfs. That’s why just bringing over an Opel Astra will not do. The Astra has a short rear overhang to help with the taxes and small parking places in Europe. Any premium small car should have a long overhang and a corresponding large 20 cubic ft cargo area. It needs low drag body work that doesn’t look like a rental car. That is one of the things wrong with the Cobalt SS. It was a rental car with a body kit. It shouldn’t look like a big Buick with a waterfall grille either, most Skyhawks only had a lower grille.
A premium small car needs to be fast and economical. It needs to go 0-60 in less than 8 seconds. A turbo 4 is a good idea for the base version, but the versions that cost over $22K need to be hybrids.
A premium small car also has to handle well. It should ride on some good ultra high performance all season tires. The base version should pull no less than .80 g on the skidpad and have an active handling system like the Corvette, the Corvette’s magnetic selective ride control should be an option.
to this comment On September 25, 2009 at 11:29 pm fredyc said:
Hybrid or electric small cars could help promoting small cars. Chevy bare necessity electric small car along Buick and Cadillac premium electric small cars.
In the Video, it is presented the Vue plug-in hybrid.
Wonder if could have like 2 versions of a Cadillac\Buick small, subcompact car. First version a gas engine version and a all electric version(60-80-100m range) , having the same design interior\exterior just with very different powertrains. Matching a gas engine Aveo with an electric Aveo may not work – very different and the electric version being much more refined than a 1.4 Aveo. Meanwhile a subcompact Buick having the same execution level as a Mini could be paired just fine with an electric version.
The gas engine version would draw more attention due to the quirky image of the electric version.
to this comment On September 26, 2009 at 6:14 pm Second CTS said:
With a preference for American cars – and for GM’s in particular – I’ve given much thought as to what direction GM should go with its smaller cars. By way of some background, I ordered my 2003 CTS with a stick shift and enjoyed rowing the gears in such a large car. I traded it for an 08 loaded CTS and now get the pleasure of whipping the summer suspension around southern California. But I will want to go smaller with my next car, and want a premium experience.
For me, premium means a car who’s base model with no options is still desirable. No apologies are ever needed for a base 3-series BMW, Audi A4 or Acura TL. Yet, GM has for too long offered cars where the stripper model cheapens the whole line. I still explain to people that I bought a “loaded” CTS. When I had a base CTS as a dealer loaner, it was clear why: Lightweight tires, and no nav, sunroof, or turning headlights. The glitz features – exterior front light-pipes and interior ambient lighting – were missing. Meanwhile, saying you bought a loaded BMW, Audi or Mercedes Benz is simply unnecessary. A premium car requires a premium reputation. No more stripped Buicks, no more cheap Cadillacs: Keep the base models loaded and the options list short.
Next, the smaller a car is, the more the meaning of “premium” shifts toward taut handling, quick acceleration and a ‘lithe’ ride – smooth, but not so smooth as to feel like it’s trying to imitate a large wheelbased sedan. Buick and Cadillac both need to take on something that GM has little in its tradition: Lively, luxurious smaller cars. To me, it’s not about concepts that no one else has, and I find the Lab’s exploration of sideways-sliding seats a distraction from what will really compete with the smaller offerings from Audi, Infiniti, Lexus and BMW.
More to the point: Offer me a Regal (nee Open Insignia) with a full performance mission. This would include a standard (base) model with a high-revving small engine, manual transmission, sport suspension, navigation, sunroof and top-end audio. In summary: Premium is when the no options model is a fully rewarding driver’s experience, and needs no explanations by the owner. Let me have it.
to this comment On September 30, 2009 at 2:11 pm Kenz300 said:
Where are GM’s small E85 capable vehicles?
Other than the HHR I do not see a small E85 capable vehicle line up.
Once again GM is focused on TRUCKS and SUV’s in their flex fuel vehicle offerings.
Small vehicle owners want fuel efficient vehicles that offer a choice of fuels at the pump.
Will small premium also mean flex?
to this comment On October 3, 2009 at 11:44 pm dfschim said:
I agree a small premium car should be able to run on E-85. It is just higher quality fuel pumps and fuel lines plus computer tuning to take advantage of the higher octane. A small premium car should also be able to run on 87 to 100 octane gas and be tuned to make more HP with the higher octane. I won’t buy the car if it can’t run on 87 octane, that is one more thing that should not be copied from the Mini, VW/Audi, Acura, Lexus or Miata.
to this comment On October 3, 2009 at 11:03 pm fredyc said:
How about GM going retro on the Buick small car.
A smaller and more luxurious Buick HHR. Little Heritage would add more flair to it. Maybe would work better than a – completely new – Buick small car. Would be cute having a spare tire in the back.
to this comment On October 4, 2009 at 9:31 pm kevinthenerd said:
My idea of luxury involves RWD, an inline-6, and a six-speed manual with double-synchros. One of the biggest deal-breakers is noise. It should have a dead-silent ride down the interstate, and the slightest rattle will break the deal. (I want to hear the super-premium radio without blasting it.) Accessories should be plentiful but not obtrusive. (Take a hint from the Scion interiors.) Include an auxillary audio input and whatnot, but don’t showcase them so much that they take away from the driving experience. Focus on driving the car every day, not on selling it to child-like buyers during a test drive. (A jumpy throttle is one example of such tactics.) Handling should never be sacrificed in the pursuit of comfort; a car that doesn’t feel confident is not a joy to drive. (A good way to achieve this balance is to introduce downforce into the design of the body. An active suspension would help too, but spend the money on refined software development.) Panel gaps should be minimized. The interior shouldn’t FEEL cheap. (My ION feels like a toy inside.) Every moving part should be padded, and mechanisms should be stiffened by interference-fit washers. Make leather standard; most of the GM cloth interiors I’ve seen feel like indoor/outdoor carpet. It’s America, so make sure the car is designed for big Americans (6 foot plus).
to this comment On October 6, 2009 at 12:56 am dfschim said:
My idea of a small premium near luxury car has FWD with AWD optional, a turbo 4 cylinder engine and a six speed automatic or CVT. It also has to have stain resistant cloth seats.
RWD means the car is nearly useless in the winter, and leather seats make it unusable on sunny summer days after sitting outside. That is why they don’t say luxury to me. A manual transmission makes a car a pain rather than a joy in city traffic; a luxury car should only have gas and brake pedals, not a clutch pedal. A luxury car should be comfortable in all weather, road conditions and traffic situations.
BMW is the only car maker making cars with I-6 engines, RWD, halfway decent fuel economy and prices under $40K. But even the 1 series weighs over 3200 lbs so it isn’t really small. An entry level Cadillac should compete with the BMW 1 and 3 series cars, but that wouldn’t be a small premium car like a 2700 lb to 2900 lb small premium Buick.
The old Datsun 280 ZX turbo was small and light enough to be a small premium car, and so was the old Mercedes 300 SL before that, but no one has proven that a small sub 3000 lb inline 6 car could be made that meets our present crash standards. The BMW 1 and 3 can meet the standard, but they are too heavy to be small premium sports cars. They are just heavy sedans that carry on the inline 6, RWD, manual transmission characteristics of old small premium sports cars but without the light weight.
to this comment On October 5, 2009 at 5:23 pm Kenz300 said:
Small Premium sounds to me like you are just looking for an excuse to raise the price.
Build a quality vehicle at a value driven price that gives customers value for their dollar.
Quality design of exterior, quality interior (work on this one, it has been a customer complaint for years), safety features, fuel economy and performance, reliability for 30 days and for 5 years. These are all important. Lastly customers need a positive dealer experience. Leaving the dealer and feeling that you have been cheated does not bring someone back to GM.
What ever market segment you plan to be in bring in the top 3 best selling vehicles in the class and compare yourself to them. If your vehicle comes out and does not take market share from them you did not do your job.
Go back and fix it. GM will not get many more chances to to it right. Building a so so vehicle will not cut it. Go for the best in class and mean it. Add standard features that build in quality.
Go read consumer reports and see what work and what does not.
It seems that GM needs some new blood because it keeps loosing market share every year. Get some new ideas and some new people. Look at the turn around Hyundai has made. They went from a joke a few years ago to a brand taking market share every year.
to this comment On October 8, 2009 at 12:29 pm Kenz300 said:
Japan’s automakers know a threat when they see one, and based on their words, it sure isn’t in Michigan. Motown is fleeting image in the Japanese carmakers’ rearview mirrors, which they’re now nervously checking for a budding South Korean juggernaut. Honda CEO Takanobu Ito minced no words when he told the Associated Press, “Hyundai is awesome. They are undoubtedly a threat because their products are cheap, and the quality is improving.” The numbers seem to bear that out, as Hyundai and its corporate sibling, Kia, continue to show substantial sales chart improvements in key markets like the Europe and the US, where it continues to show strong growth while many other automakers look at double-digit shortfalls year-over-year. Nissan’s Shiro Nakamura echoes Honda’s Ito when it comes to identifying Japan’s new boogeyman, “Hyundai is the biggest threat for the Japanese automakers. They have the technology, but they seem to have cheaper labour.”
Hyundai, once basically a joke (we all remember such legendary products as the Excel, pictured above), is catching the Japanese by beating them at their own game — offering a mix of value and quality that’s hard for shoppers to ignore. Japan knows it needs to defend itself, too. After all, once upon a time, they were what Hyundai is now. In the grand scheme of things, it wasn’t too long ago that one could chuckle at Honda’s initial foray into the States. We know how that turned out. Now you have to wonder how long it’ll be until we see quotes from Hyundai’s leadership talking about the Chinese the way Nissan and Japan talk about Hyundai.
[Source: The Canadian Press via TTAC)
Maybe you should look at what Hyundai did to turn around their company…. The gain in market share is impressive. ………………….. Quality and Value … Can GM duplicate their success???????
Quality and Value
to this comment On October 9, 2009 at 5:54 pm getalifeagain said:
If you want a unique way of making small cars (or any cars) safe, then wrap a bumper around the whole car, just like the 1954 Muntz Jet. It was very safe!
to this comment On October 13, 2009 at 7:45 pm Jean-Paul Beaugrand said:
Regardless of “market segment” or “buyer demographic,” any product that aspires to be “Premium” should be just that- ACTUALLY WORTH MORE THAN THE MUNDANE, not just badged as a “premium product.”
A “Premium” car, regardless of size, should be a good VALUE, should be more RELIABLE than the mundane, and should be more DURABLE than the average car. A “Premium” product should be obviously BETTER.
Unfortunately, I’m not convinced that GM isn’t still run by people who truly don’t understand why the Cimarron was such a failure:
“Everything that was wrong, venal, lazy and mendacious about GM in the 1980s was crystallized in this flagrant insult to the good name and fine customers of Cadillac. Spooked by the success of premium small cars from Mercedes-Benz, GM elected to rebadge its awful mass-market J-platform sedans, load them up with chintzy fabrics and accessories and call them “Cimarron, by Cadillac.”
Whatever “premium” product you decide to make shouldn’t show up on anybody’s “10 worst” list. Ever.
to this comment On October 17, 2009 at 3:55 pm Second CTS said:
Following my previous post, GM announced the re-issuance of the Buick Regal, based on the Opel / Vauxhall Insignia. A very good start, in my view. To provide a premium experience, the Regal line should be based three models, all of which should have navigation, sunroof, premium sound and MagnaRide suspension standard:
- The Regal L(uxury), with about 180 to 200 hp, 6-speed automatic, leather, Quiet-tuning, and MagnaRide tuned for comfort for about $30,000;
- The Regal S(port) with about 220 to 260 hp, 6-speed auto or manual, cloth, V-tires, no Quiet-tuning and MagnaRide tuned for handling for about $33,000; and
- The Regal GS with about 300 hp, 6-speed auto or manual, leather, Z-tires, bigger wheels, Quiet-tuning, and MagnaRide tuned for handling for about $37,000.
This means there’s no entry level Regal. This means that the Regal is not a step-down from the LaCrosse, but a premium driver’s car (as opposed to a premium passengers’ car). This means that every Regal driver knows that every other Regal on the road is a first-rate premium driving experience.
to this comment On October 17, 2009 at 9:07 pm dfschim said:
That’s way too expensive. The base version needs to have a 2.4 with the 6 speed automatic and cloth seats for $23K. Then there can be a 2.0 turbo version and 2.4 hybrid version for around $26K. The 3.6 V-6 version should be around $28 K. But the Regal isn’t really a small car. There should be a compact Skylark and a subcompact Skyhawk as small premium Buicks.
to this comment On October 24, 2009 at 4:09 pm Second CTS said:
“But the Regal isn’t really a small car. ”
That’s my point – the Regal shouldn’t be a “small” Buick – it’s pretty similar is size to the La Crosse. Instead, it’s mission should be as a driver’s car, competing with the image of the Acura TL, Audi A4 or small Infiniti. I think there’s a window of opportunity for Buick to fashion in the minds of customers a new image of what an entry level Buick might be. It needn’t be a continuation of Buick’s past – that would be a confirmation that nothing about the brand has changed. But if the Regal is positioned as a driver’s car, it could provide an opening for GM in a market in which it has rarely done well.
to this comment On October 19, 2009 at 1:14 pm Jean-Paul Beaugrand said:
“Small Premium” should be sized to seat 4 adults comfortably, while offering better-than-average comfort and convenience options; and/or it should have better-than-mundane performance- including safety, emissions, and fuel economy.
But primarily, it should have outstandingly better reliability, durability, and a much higher degree of QUALITY than the average vehicle, with an ironclad, bumper-to-bumper that far exceeds the industry norm. If executed properly, the quality of the vehicle should make warranty claims very rare.
The “Small Premium” vehicle should be made to last 30 years or longer.
to this comment On October 23, 2009 at 9:45 am Kenz300 said:
GM — you need to listen to your customers……..for too long you have ignored their complaints and market share declined. Listen to your customers and try to fix whatever the complaint is.
You have been loosing market share for 30 years. You just came out of bankruptcy.
You can not continue to loose market share and customers and survive. The clock is ticking.
How many more vehicle launches (chances) are you going to get?
Build the best…… Quality and Value will sell and bring back customers.
If your vehicle is not taking market share in it’s class .. find out what is wrong and fix it. Do not wait for the next model make over.
Just saying you have quality vehicles does not make it so. When you are taking market share from the leaders in the class the Quality and Value of the product will speak for itself.
I would like to see GM succeed but I am not sure it can be done with the old blood running thru it’s veins. You need some new blood and some new ideas.
Why not try to get some talent from APPLE to help with technology. (joint product development?)
Why not try to get some talent from Toyota to figure out this quality and reliability thing.
Why not get some talent from Hyundai to see how they turned around a company that was a joke a few years ago into a company taking market share now.
Why not look at how Ford stayed out of bankruptcy and is producing some interesting Green vehicles. (think eco boost)
Why not look at how Toyota and Lexus are using hybrid technology to actually improve milage of their vehicles and not just a cosmetic boost for their trucks.
Why not look at Nissan and see why they are moving fast with electric vehicles in your home market.
Why did GM do so poorly in the cash for clunkers sales?
to this comment On October 23, 2009 at 9:24 pm accord98 said:
About time that GM introducing small premium car. Better be affordable as well and fuel efficient. If its not affordable American kids won’t be able to afford it. Not many too Asian are big fan of GM product. They product are engineer, built, design just for the big and tall American, just like the people who came up with it. Asian have smaller figure, therefore Japan car would fit us well. 95% of Asian are driving Japanese or European car instead of the big three. The biggest reason why GM fail is, because American (white and black and spanish) are always broke. These people are always want to party and have fun at the moment. And always living pay check to pay check. They don’t value what money and thing they have. In the end they dont have money to buy or lease a new car. Unlike Asian we live with our parents and relative so we can save money. Instead of renting apartment, we would rather help our parents or relative pay their mortgage or rent. We know what is like to be in poor situation and we have higher ethical standard. When we experiencing being poor we will know what is like and money will play a major role. Always be frugal and never ever take thing for granted. We all work hard for money, therefore we should respect how money being spent.
to this comment On November 14, 2009 at 12:53 pm ed said:
“The biggest reason why GM fail is,
. . . because American are always broke.
. . . These people are always . . . “WANT”
, , , to party and have fun at the moment.
. . . And always living pay check to pay check.”
How true! But, it takes a non-American to point this out to us.
As Robert Burns said,
“Oh, what a giftee the good Lord gie us
. . . to see ourselves as others see us.”
NOT all americans fall into the category of
. . . “A Fool and His Money are Soon Parted,”
. . . who will buy anything, if someone is foolish enough
. . . to loan them the money to buy it.
Shut down the “LOANs” and the only ones that can buy cars
. . . are those who have “CASH,”
. . . BUT, people with “CASH,” insist on “VALUE” for their money,
. . . and SUV’s cost too much to buy, operate and maintain, to be of an “VALUE.”
So then, few cars are being bought,
. . . car companies go bankrupt and
. . . try to get “BACK TO BASIC’s.”
Then they have to decide to sell very few cars to the RICH
. . . or many, many cars to the poor.
Everyone knows what the RICH want.
What do poor people who have “CASH” want?
. . . a vehicle that saves them money to buy, operate and maintain,
. . . a vehicle they use all week long in their business and
. . . their family is seen in on the weekend.
In other words, a man’s “Work”vehicle that’s “Pretty!” enough for a Lady.
Are there such vehicles?
. . . Yes there are, but you won’t find them in America . . . Yet!
. . . Electric’s that save money to buy, operate and maintain
. . . that cost as little as 2 cents a mile to operate.
http://forums.treehugger.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=13105#p89181
to this comment On October 26, 2009 at 2:53 pm Kenz300 said:
Toyota’s new hybrid passenger vehicle, the Sai. The compact luxury sedan is scheduled to go on sale in December
to this comment On October 30, 2009 at 3:26 pm hammershipdown said:
What is Small Premium? To me, Premium begins with choices and options. When you look at some of the small cars out today like the Smart Car or Mini Cooper, the first thing you see is Color. A large color palette to choose from and options like Two Tones. In 1955, Chevrolet had 14 color options & 21 Two Tone options. Just take a look here – http://www.55classicchevy.com/body-colors.html – Today’s market has bred a lack of color and with it a lack of uniquiness that makes more and more cars look alike and limits the “fun” in choice for the savings in mass production. At least that is my best guess as to why most consumers are left with little choice in the matter. Black, White, Silver or Grey, Blue & Red. This appears to be the typical palette of today and makes even shopping for a car a bit boring.
As a fan of the 1955 Chevy, I have recently become very found of the HHR. It has a classic body style that revives the beauty of the late 40’s and early 50’s chevrolet. For the 30-50 year old male, this is a dream come true – something classic and fun, unique and effective, with the ability to handle a family. It’s something to be excited about! I do not consider the size of the HHR to fit into the “small premium” catagory, but it does make me realize that today’s cars can have the beauty of their best generations past while endulging in the current modern technologies.
There are a multitude of elements that I believe can transform the sub compact car into a premium vehicle. Here is a short list of ideas I think would be very nice to see in the future GM products.
1. Flex Fuel migrated with Hybrid technology. From my understanding it is relatively inexpensive to adjust regular gasoline cars into Flex Fuel machines & it makes me wonder why an automaker would not just drop the “gasoline only” ride altogether to give their customers “Fuel Options?”
2. Solar Rooftops & Bumper Fans. Here are 2 simple resources for energy collecting that have yet to see the light of day in the commercial market. Simple “Green Options” to feel better about our use or abuse of our environment.
3. E1 (Electric First) – I want to see Hybrids utilize the electric motor for the first 100 miles before the fuel kicks in. In short, from research I have come across, 75% of the cars on the road average 75 miles a day. If this is true, E1 Technology would simply cut emissions drastically…
4. Plug in – I can’t think of a single reason why any Hybrid or Electric Car would not have this option? Like the Flex Fuel, diversifiying the consumers ability to charge or fuel their car is opening up a new industry, the fuel industry. To free ourselves form oil cartel is truly in the hands of this industry. It’s time for the auto industry to strike back from our suppressed upbringing. GM can do this!
5. Options! Options! Options! Whether it’s the small premium or the largest fastest car you make, giving the consumer options on exterior colors, interior colors & fabrics, whether it is the type of sound system, tv, phone or technology package available – the consumer needs to have choice, and with choice, the consumer can purchase the car they want, rather than the closest thing you have to what they want.
6. Kill Bad Design! Simple Example – The 2005 – 2007 HHR brought bad design from the PT Cruiser to it’s line. Yes, I’m talking about window buttons! No one ever wanted window buttons in the center console, it’s clear from blogging HHR customers that every agreed & yet it took Chevrolet 2-3 years to fix it. It’s important not to re-invent the wheel while re-inventing your product. You can be creative and unique without trying to re-train the public how to roll down a window.
7. Websites – chevrolet.com has this great tool to put together your car and order it – I want that! and “I want that” is something, you should want to hear. However, again, the options are limited, I can’t see these options change in the little 3d picture – well, the color changes, but that’s it and the color options are limited and bland. Give me the tools to create “MY CAR” and i will buy it!
My last thoughts – Think of it like this, apple makes the touch screen iphone & the ipod – while i really dig the modern day walkman, i don’t need to 2 things that could be one. I plan to someday buy an iphone, but only when it has 100 plus gigs of space and a changeable battery. Those 2 items have been complained about and asked for, for many years… When dealing with the consumer, give us what we want, don’t wait around and try to sell us something today and something tomorrow – i think you get where I”m going with this.
And lastly, I love the 60 day guarentee and it sounds like it is working well, however, my only suggestion is this – make it 90 days! 3 Months has a much better ring to it than 60.
to this comment On October 31, 2009 at 3:51 am dfschim said:
“Flex Fuel migrated with Hybrid technology. From my understanding it is relatively inexpensive to adjust regular gasoline cars into Flex Fuel machines & it makes me wonder why an automaker would not just drop the “gasoline only” ride altogether to give their customers “Fuel Options?””
I agree completely. It only cost around $100 more for fuel pumps and lines that can withstand alcohol. GM should make flex fuel standard for all their gasoline powered vehicles.
“Plug in – I can’t think of a single reason why any Hybrid or Electric Car would not have this option?”
I can think of a single very good reason. Price. I would rather have a $25K hybrid car that didn’t plug in than a $40K car that did plug in.
If your reason for wanting plug in technology is to help the environment, it doesn’t, given our current mix of old coal fired power plants. Curing that problem is beyond GM’s control.
to this comment On October 31, 2009 at 11:34 am Dwight Looi said:
Let’s face it. Hybrids do not make economic sense. At $3 a gallon, a 30 mpg car uses $1250 worth of gasoline a year driving the typical 12,500 miles. Raise the efficiency to 45 mpg and it uses $833 a year. It takes about 10 years to recover the $4000 in hybrid drive train’s premium, assuming there’s no additional incidentals such as battery replacement or repairs of the electric sub-systems. Nobody who can do elementary school math puts down money on hybrid technology to break even in 10 years, that’s longer than most new car buyers own their purchase. Even at $6 a gallon you won’t save a dim for half a decade.
Hence, Hybrids are appeal mostly to a subset of buyers who are looking for the “Green” feel good factor. These individuals typically believe in the Global Warming Hypothesis and other environmental concerns — nevermind that the Earth is currently cooling and that there has never been scientific or statistical proof of androgynous climate change as a result of CO2 emissions. They make their consumption decisions to look and feel better about themselves and in front of their similarly minded peers. Such buyers constitute about 5~10% of the market. Add to that individuals who dwell on Hybrids based on more practical considerations like car pool lane exemptions and tax rebates and you are looking at maybe 10~15% of the market. Not an insignificant chunk, but not where most of any company’s revenue would come from.
It is hence extremely important to not get carried away with the whole Hybrid agenda. A GM premium compact strategy would not be made or broken based on its hybrid variant. I’ll be made or broken based on all the conventional things that made the 3-series and C-class the successes that they are — good looks, quality interiors, entertaining performance and confidence inspiring handling. I suggest the following powertrain line up for the Cadillac ATS and whatever other compact is built on the Alpha platform:-
Hybrid: 1.4H — an uprated Family Zero 1.4 turbo engine and a permanent magnet rear differential motor making 180 + 40 hp and 180 + 80 lb-ft. 40 / 35 mpg
Entry: 2.0T — a low boost, high compression variant of the LNF engine making 220hp @ 6600 rpm and 180 lb-ft @ 1600 rpm using 10.7:1 compression, DI, VVT and a Garrett GT20 turbo churning out 7~8 psi of boost. 24/32 mpg.
Mainstream: 3.0 — Simply the excellent LF1 engine making 270hp @ 7000 rpm and 223 lb-ft @ 5700 rpm at 11.7:1 compression, DI, VVT and natural aspiration. 20/30 mpg
Performance: 5.5 — Generation V small block making 420 hp @ 6200 rpm and 400 lb-ft @ 5200 rpm at 12.3:1 compression, DI, VVT, AFM and natural aspiration. 17 / 26 mpg
to this comment On November 3, 2009 at 3:06 am dfschim said:
You are not looking at the hybrid math properly. A 30 mpg example does exist, the Kia Forte at $18K. There is no hybrid at the 45 mpg mark. There is the high technology Prius at $22K and 50 mpg, or the lower technology Insight at the same $22K but only 42 mpg. The Prius saves $5000 in gas over 10 years, so the high tech hybrid comes out ahead. The lower tech Honda only saves $3570 in gas, it comes out behind at the 10 year mark. It really doesn’t matter whether someone trades the car in at 5 years or keeps it for 10 years, the savings should be figured in to the trade in price at the 5 year mark; who doesn’t think the Prius will have a better trade in value than the Forte?
A RWD compact has an even smaller market than a high technology hybrid. Mercedes and BMW don’t even sell 4 cylinder 3 and C class cars here in the US anymore, that market is too small. The 3.0 has enough of a market for BMW and Mercedes to sell the cars for $33K. Naturally the market for a 5.5 V-8 compact is miniscule. Those 6 cylinder cars weigh 3400-3500 lbs which is too heavy to be considered a small premium car.
That is why the Buick small premium car needs to be based on a FWD platform. That way the prices can stay in the $20K range and the weight can stay down to 2700 to 2900 lbs. A selection of 1.6, 1.8 and 2.0 turbos plus a hybrid model will work fine in the lighter FWD cars.
to this comment On November 2, 2009 at 11:11 am Mike C said:
Having just returned from Europe, I saw hundreds of small cars in Paris, tiny, ugly and undesirable, including A Class Mercedes. GM must not go in that direction!
Instead, produce cars that are spacious for 4, with attractive interior, infotainment, and battery powered and/or battery assisted. An ATS with battery assist could eliminate low mpg in city traffic, while giving a quiet interior that should provide high-fidelity audio to alleviate the rush-hour slog. Not everyone wants a “penalty box” of a car, but rather a smaller nimble car that provides a calm and relaxing drive, even when the driving environment is not relaxing.
to this comment On November 2, 2009 at 11:28 am Mike C said:
Small luxury cars will sell well in urban environments because they are easier to maneuver in tight spaces, such as narrow roads and small parking spaces. GM small luxury cars should include as standard equipment parking assists, such as rear view camera and front and rear sensors to make parking easier.
GM will have to provide better warranties to get people to buy their cars again. I have had 2 Buick engine failures, under warranty. With GM’s acknowledged reliability problems, I will not buy another GM product without “Complete Coverage” that last 7 or more years, with 100,000 miles or more.
GM’s poor resale is a reflection of GM reliability problems. If the cars are better, then you MUST back them better.
to this comment On November 3, 2009 at 2:01 pm Kenz300 said:
Just watched the new Lexus commercial on TV. WOW
The technology and innovation displayed in the commercial is something to think about.
Lexus improves their models every couple of years. The improvements are more than cosmetic but they also get the cosmetic touches rite.
Can GM compete with the best?
Bring the best in each class into your LAB. Dissect the vehicle and see why it is number one in it’s class.
Then build a world class competitor.
to this comment On November 3, 2009 at 3:02 pm go_gm said:
concerning the buick la crosse, i really like the interior/exterior styling. what i don’t get is engine hp output. the la crosse looks like a fairly good sized car. bigger than a camry? looks it.
gm has developed these wonder new direct injection engines. the camaro rs gets one of these new direct injection engines in V-6 form. problem is, the V-6 in the camaro puts out 304 horsepower. the top of the line engine in the la crosse puts out 280. whats the deal gm?
why not give buick the full output that engine can give? it certainly looks bigger and heavier than the camaro. the la crosse gets a suspension that is responsive but gets a de-tuned engine? this makes absolutely no sense to me, especially when buick is trying to shed it’s grandma and grandpa image here in the states. you want to shed that image? give it good handling and lots of power while retaining the luxuries.
to this comment On November 13, 2009 at 3:24 am Jean-Paul Beaugrand said:
The engine in the LaCrosse is probably tuned for more low-end torque, which is needed to get the heavier vehicle rolling. The LaCrosse transmission is also configured to shift at lower RPMs than the Camaro, so the higher revs necessary to produce more horsepower aren’t used.
I think the French and the Italians already have a pretty good handle on what constitutes “Small Premium,” the Germans have a clue, and the Japanese are catching on. With the French it’s a supple, soft, yet responsive suspension, with the Italians it’s insane amounts of power from tiny engines, the Germans understand chassis stiffness, and the Japanese have a good handle on QC. Put that all together in a small-to-medium size American car and you might have something.
The G8 was pretty close to “Small Premium.” It just needed another 5 years of refinements, and some fanatical QC.
to this comment On November 14, 2009 at 6:34 pm dfschim said:
All the G8 needed to be small premium was a 1000 lb cut in weight, a 10 inch cut in length and a 6 inch cut in width. First cut 10 inches in wheelbase, and 6 inches in width. Next put in a FWD turbo 4 since the car weighs so much less. That should get you your weight savings. The G8 was a large car. GM should build small premium cars on the Opel Astra and Corsa platforms with the 1.6 and 2.0 turbo engines.
to this comment On November 7, 2009 at 9:53 pm Alex said:
Priorities for small luxury car:
• Brand name consistent with luxury (no frequent gimmicks to increase temporary sale volume)
• Uniqueness – something that is not readily available as a non-luxury product
• Delivery of advanced but proven technology – e.g. for handling, braking, engine efficiency, etc.
• Styling and ergonometric
• Interior and exterior quality and workmanship
• Well tuned driving and stopping performance
to this comment On November 17, 2009 at 9:13 pm GrayLionsDelta6 said:
Spend money on the drive train and ride. Make sure there is something that is only available on this model (retina scans, voice recognition, computer interface, something).
I agree that gaudy isn’t “premium”
Make sure someone on the team is old enough to remember the Cimmaron and the horrible example of marketing it was. Badge engineering will not work for this.
to this comment On November 19, 2009 at 1:40 am dfschim said:
The Cimarron is a perfect example of what not to do. It looked like a chrome plated Cavalier, and had the exact same engines. Putting design cues from big luxury cars on a compact is not the way to go about making a small premium car.
On the other hand the car has to share the same platform as other GM cars to keep the base price down to $20K for the base model. The Opel Astra has an improved suspension over the Chevy Cruze, and its 1.6 and 2.0 turbo engines are an improvement over the 1.4 turbo in the Cruze. The platform and engines are a perfect basis for a small premium car. The sheet metal is not.
Don’t think of bringing the Opel Astra over with a waterfall grille and a trunk. That trick won’t work with the Astra like it did for the Insignia/Regal. A small premium American car needs a fastback hatchback with 20 cu ft of trunk space. It needs low drag body work that takes its inspiration from the Skyhawks and Reatta, not the gaudy chrome waterfall grille, portholes and sweepspear from the 1950’s.
to this comment On November 23, 2009 at 2:21 am KenZ300 said:
2010 Motor Trend Car of the Year: Ford Fusion
Maybe next year GM ….. or maybe not
to this comment On November 25, 2009 at 4:49 am Jean-Paul Beaugrand said:
“Small Premium” could converge into “Bare Necessity” if the 4-seat requirement was lifted. A 2-seater with space for 4 bags of groceries, like a Miata or a Solstice, would suit my “Bare Necessity” needs, if the price was right- that is, under $15K; the “fun factor” makes it “premium.”
Get the patent rights for the van den Brink Carver- price it under $15-20K and it would sell like crazy: the $65K+ price tag made it a tad too “premium,” the fact it wasn’t sold in the US doomed it to fail.
to this comment On November 26, 2009 at 1:15 am DM3 said:
I’ve been thinking about this again. Not a small premium car as a concept, but as an actual car that can be bought from your friendly neighborhood Buick dealer. The car needs a few things: It needs tech stuff that isn’t typically seen on small cars. It needs navigation, LED lighting that actually makes sense like lights for the cup holders, lights for the floors both in front and in back, map lights in front and in back. DVD players in the headrests and bluetooth headsets so that parents aren’t continually annoyed by spongebob. It needs a full premium interior made from first rate materials. It also needs styling that is the perfect blend of sophistication and intimidation. It needs styling that wouldn’t make Darth Vader feel like a complete idiot for driving around in one. Styling should be a bold mix of stylish lines and a “face” of the car that has a distinctly menacing look to it. Yes, this is a Buick I’m talking about here. Buicks are allowed to be menacing.
to this comment On December 2, 2009 at 10:15 pm Jim_E85 said:
Premium means powerful. Turbo a small engine, and make it specifically for E85 fuel. You can get more power out of 105 octane E85. Optimise it for E85 and you’ll have more power.
Premium means quality interior components. Not cheap fabrics and plastics- but much higher quality materials. Put in some real teak wood. Put in some high quality leather. Put in materials you wouldn’t expect to find in a car- but do find in luxury jets. Yes, color LCD screens. Yes, heated windshield wipers. Yes, heated FRONT windshield. Things to think about.
to this comment On December 4, 2009 at 9:11 pm seano said:
Small premium needs several things. It must be stylish, but not overwrought. It must be small on the outside but big on the inside. All materials need to have the “perceived quality” that Bob Lutz spoke of (and GM has improved at recently). GM needs to target not just the dimensions, but also the curb weight of the competitors, which GM frequently neglects to do. And importantly, this car must be reasonably powerful, yet fuel efficient. And when I say reasonably powerful, I don’t mean like the Chevy Cruze which is a great car but they are trying to tell us that 136 hp and 138 hp are decent enough numbers? It desperately needs the 2.0L Turbo as an optional engine, and GM cannot pretend that any power number even close to the aforementioned will sell to the public. Most people will see similar vehicles with good enough (or even matching) fuel economy and considerably more power and go straight for those instead. There is a minimum standard that must be met. Overall, I like GM’s idea for the small premium car, whose time has come in the North American market, but it needs to pay attention to every detail.
to this comment On December 13, 2009 at 6:56 am kts350 said:
Alot of people haves aid the same thing about the Cruze down under, in Australia we get two choices of power plants a 1.8L petrol and a 2.0l TDI.. The TDI is the pick of the engines as the 1.8l just doesn’t seem to cope with tubby weight of the Cruze.. I know the cruze is selling well downunder but I think having the option of a petrol engine with more power that copes with the weight better would win more sales..
to this comment On December 5, 2009 at 1:50 am DM3 said:
Jim, the custom luxury jet thing is a nice idea, but the jets you speak of are rather rare with hand built custom interiors. Most biz jets are pretty much flying conference rooms. They’re nice, but not exactly what rock stars have.
to this comment On December 6, 2009 at 2:57 pm Kenz300 said:
Green Car Journal names the Audi A3 TDI the 2010 Green Car of the Year. The magazine awarded the A3 TDI the award over the Toyota Prius, Mercury Milan Hybrid, and Volkswagen Golf TDI.
“This compact luxury car features an impressive EPA estimated 42 mpg on the highway – a 50 percent highway fuel efficiency improvement over the standard gasoline engine A3,” says Ron Cogan from Green Car Journal.
to this comment On December 11, 2009 at 7:17 pm onesuperspytwo said:
Small premium, I think that Cadillac’s intention to enter the small near luxury market may be pushing that demographic a bit, much like Jaguars also ran entry level sedans. I realize that the two makers are targeting similar demographics, and therein lay my argument. If Cadillac can pull it off with hybrid or electric technology then that’s a bonus and will enjoy success and is always good, but I think that with the makers return to respectability, it should concentrate on the markets that it is enjoying success in. The sport wagon is a good idea, as is the SRX, but another offering would “overly saturate” the market. I think that a better way to go would be to “hybridize” or offer hybrid versions of the CTS and STS without drastically changing the overall vehicle dynamics. Also, it’s time to update or refresh the STS, keep it clean and sophisticated.
Buick, these guys are on to something with the new Lacrosse. Good looks, good dynamics, appealing to a younger demographic. It has charm, and sophistication.
SAAB, hate to see it go, I realize that the deal fell through, but, let SAAB be SAAB, and don’t take the niche out of the SAAB niche market, this will return it to the favorable position and loyal following that it enjoyed until GM epsilon the platforms. I guess that this goes without saying, but you have to let a SAAB be a SAAB. Continue to nurture SAAB technology, i.e. the use of turbo-charging and high output small displacement engines. This is the key to fuel economy and why the 9000 series was able to pull off 250hp marvels which set track records, and essentially the formula that Ford is using with its new Eco-Techs.
GMC, get rid of the midsized whatever that thing is that’s trying to be an Equinox. I see it as GMC’s Aztec. Of course one opinion will not sway the thinking of an automaker, but honestly, I expect more from the “Professional Grade” people. Keep the Denali Sierra, great looking, great performance, and it looks like the Bosses truck.
Chevy; refresh the Malibu, its due for an SS to contend with LE Camry’s, 3.5 Altimas, and the new generation VW’s. This is still the bread and butter auto segment for auto makers and to keep the Malibu competitive incremental upgrades need to be made. My Malibu LTZ is a pretty good vehicle. It’s good on the highway, it goes about its business in a pretty respectable manner, and however, it’s quickly losing its appeal. I’ve had it for two years and its beginning to feel dated. The interior looks good, but that scruffy rough whatever the material is on the dash scars easily and soft towels leave residue on them. That’s a big time no-go when one considers that this is a family sedan, and that same rough surface could scratch some unsuspecting child left to run wild in someone’s front seat. It happens, so it has to be addressed. The Caprice rear wheel drive replacement for the G8 sound like a good idea. The G8 is a phenomenal value and I hate to see it go. I see lots of them on the road and it’s either a good vehicle or the cash for clunker program was a phenomenal success. Either way, it would be a good idea to add it to Chevy’s lineup.
Well GM you asked, and here it is. An honest opinion from a guy who “knows” cars. Over the past 22 years I have owned or models from each of GM’s lineups and four Saab 9000’s so I speak from experience, and I am an avid automobile publication reader, so I live and breathe auto news and information
to this comment On December 13, 2009 at 6:52 am kts350 said:
I really think should come up with a compact luxary car to rival something like the 3 series BMW’s, Holden several years ago showed concept car in Australia called the Torana which was well recieved at time, it was RWD and featured a twin turbo V6 smaller than a Commodore (or G8) which is what we see as a large car downunder..
GM has many different power plants available and could relistically make the car with several different engines to satisfy everyone, Hybrid, TDI, Turbo 4 and a turbo V6 version I would love to see an AWD version as well GM could take the premium euro brands on at their own game with this car..
If GM can make a smaller luxary car and not over price it i think they could be onto a winner, I’m sure people would consider a GM it if offered the same or more luxary then a comparable euro brand for a better price specially with a few different powerplant choices GM could also go the way of BMW does with it’s M-Series cars and offer a model with a turbo V6..
to this comment On December 18, 2009 at 1:27 pm Fortex555 said:
I think that GM should bring back some of the old Buick pedigree of the Buick Grand National Type-T and GNX with the release of a top tier Buick Regal/Insignia equipped with 2800 2.8L”High-Feature” V6 Turbocharged and AWD. Basically SAAB Turbo X equipment in a Buick badge please. The Epsilon II chassis is a great platform for the new Regal to sit on, and the selection of four cylinder engines are good for entry level buyers. However for your more upscale clients looking for more power, performance and feature (Yes we are still out here not everyone wants a electric vehicle, because rapid deforestation is the problem to global warming, not the 20% C02 emission of civilian vehicles =) the four cylinder selections are a bit of a turn off. This is where a limited production top tier SAAB Turbo X equipment in a Buick badge comes into play.
I think you guys can and should do it, because the people in Dearborn are putting on a quite a SHO!
to this comment On February 6, 2010 at 2:06 am dfschim said:
Yes to AWD as premium, no to RWD as premium. RWD is old fashioned and not suitable for the winters here in the US. It may work fine down under.
to this comment On December 22, 2009 at 8:12 pm jadanave said:
What should premium mean? Quality. Not “features”. Forget small electronics. Even jewelry is off the mark. If you love machines – and cars are the ultimate machines – you should be thinking fine mechanical watches and fine firearms (I hate violence, but fine firearms display a level of the sort of true quality to which I refer.)
What good are gimmicks such as moving dash panels if the materials are commonplace?
I believe that designer Robert Cumberford once said that an automaker could do very well offering “the most expensive small cars ever made”. I think it can be safely assumed that he had in mind real quality as being the reason for the cost.
Such a product should serve to educate consumers on the difference between price and cost.
It is all but impossible to find true quality today.
I love the idea of an exquisite small car. The fewer “features” the better. Of course, I would expect power windows, seats and door locks. But I would prefer a solid mechanical package with a minimum of toys. I prefer to decide for myself when to lock my doors, turn on my lights, wipers etc. I don’t need or want a multitude of settings to be made. I would like to see finely crafted gauges on the IP and not a cheap display for setting all sort of parameters. The turn signal stalk should do no more than light related functions at most.
If the owner’s manuel is more than a few pages long you have gone too far with the toys.
Joe da Nave
to this comment On December 24, 2009 at 10:13 am fredyc said:
IIt has been made public that Aston Martin will launch the Cygnet model. It will be build using Toyota’s IQ frame.
It is an ultra-luxurious small car, Aston Martin levels interior, quite unbelievable. It also has no heritage like Mini. It’s market success would be a reference for luxurious small cars like GM’s small Buick or Cadillac. Both small models won’t have heritage(like Mini) and have to promote the concept of small luxury. Something to keep an eye on.
to this comment On December 29, 2009 at 3:18 pm Jean-Paul Beaugrand said:
When I think “Premium,” I think “better than average” and “inherently worth more.”
That means using the most durable possible materials, the most reliable fabrication and construction methods, the best mechanical ans structural design, and CLASSIC, TIMELESS STYLING.
It shouldn’t look “dated”in 5 years or 10 or 30.
Good examples of what I consider to be “timeless” style are :
The 1st gen Ford Taurus (IMHO still looks “contemporary,” 25 years later), Citroen DS and CX sedans (still look 30 years ahead of the times), ’60s-’70s VW Karmann Ghia, E-type Jaguar, Ferrari 250 GTO, Fiat 850 and 124 Spyders, Studebaker Avanti, ‘59 Plymouth Valiant (beat the Mustang’s “long hood, short trunk” look to the market by 5 years), ‘55 and ‘57 Chevy, any Rolls-Royce from the ’70s to the ’90s, the mid-’80s Jag XJ sedans, and a good many of the late ’30s luxury sedans (I’m particularly fond of the ‘38-’39 Buicks and Packards, and of course the ‘35-36 Auburns and Cords).
How well are today’s styling designs going to compare with the classics, 10 or 20 years from now?
Not well, I suspect.
to this comment On February 25, 2010 at 12:20 pmBrian Colvin said:
When I think of Small Premium, I think of the Cimaron, the X-type, etc.
Europeans go for small luxury. They pay 35k for hatchbacks with FWD and Leather. They pay 50K for FWD 4 door “saloons”.
In the US, we like things big. We like our room.
Don’t let this become one of those studies like the boys across town at FMC did with the Expedition when they asked buyers….. “What do you want from the next generation Exp?” and they answered with “something bigger”. They listened and sales were horrendous.
Know what some of us really want? A car with enough room for 4 people over 6 ft tall. There are a LOT of people in the US who are tall. I’m 6 ft 3, my wife is 6 ft 1, my 17 year old stepson is 6 ft 2. I have a 3 year old who is a shade under 4 ft. We cannot find a car where we can all fit that is under 25k.