GM Inside News Forum banner

Full sized cars are becoming an endangered spices....

12K views 146 replies 65 participants last post by  jpd80 
#1 ·
In the early 1970s, Muscle cars took a thrashing in sales as personal luxury coupes started stealing sales and dominating the market (restrictive pollution standards didn't start kickin in until 1973, and CAFE's fuel economy standards first year wasn't till 1978!).

Today we're seeing almost the exact same severe shift in buyer preference deserting full size cars in favor of crossovers as we did from muscle to personal luxury coupes in the early 70s.

Are we about to see large family cars become extinct the way muscle cars did due to marketplace changes?

http://autoweek.com/article/car-news/full-size-sedan-dead
 
#2 ·
Makes sense. If you need room, a crossover is a far more convenient choice. That said, even as the muscle car market imploded, the market didn't disappear entirely. But, the cars became more specialized. Pony cars continued to morph and find sales as did cars like the Buick Grand National. Wonder how the large car might evolve to find its niche?
 
#5 ·
Detroit actually tried to save the muscle car market in a couple of ways.

The all new 1973 Grand Am was to be the new Pontiac GTO. In addition to performance (Pontiac's SD455 engine was developed for this GTO, though never used in it) it was to set a new standard of handling, which the renamed Grand Am did. Instead what we got that year was the "afterthought GTO" (a base LeMans with fake NACA ducts in the hood and baby moon (aka: dog dish) hubcaps). Chrysler kept the Roadrunner around by using optional police 440s in a version of Plymouth's version based on the Fury.

Instead Pontiac entered what was thought to be the new front of muscle cars: Muscle compacts.

These cars included the Ventura GTO, but were beaten to market by Dodge Dart and Plymouth Duster 360s, Chevrolet's "Heavy Chevy" Novas then Nova SS', Ford's Maverick Grabbers, and additional offerings from Oldsmobile and Buick. Everyone abandoned the effort by 1976 except Chrysler...... Volare Roadrunners and Aspen R/Ts of the mid 70s were essentially high performance engines with 2 barrel carbs stuck on top of them and still ran on regular gas.

These 2 barrel compacts also outaccelerated Pontiac Trans Ams of the day.

Pony cars were caught up in the illusion that they too were going to face the public shift to other cars. AMC and Chrysler prematurely killed off their cars (Challenger, Barracuda, and Javelin all saw substantial sales gains their last year... as did Camaro, and Firebird in 1974), being that the energy crisis actually turned the public more towards pony cars.

Muscle cars most certainly died in the 1970.. and there were none for a very long time.

Nothing became more specialized. The Grand National you mentioned came more than a decade after muscle cars died. The HO305 powered Monte Carlo SS', Oldsmobile 442 Cutlass, and Grand Prixs came out well into the 1980s. Thunderbird's Turbo Coupe came out about the same time, but it's 1999's Thunderbird Supercoupe that is more in line with what muscle cars were. Later, the 1994 Impala SS continued the meaning of the word for a few years, and it wasn't till GTO's return that we saw another muscle car.

Today, a good Honda Accord or Nissan Maxima with a V6 can outrun most everything from the original Muscle Car era. But the car that captures what muscle cars were about back then (large size, comfortable interiors, big engines accelerating big cars at quick rates) is almost exclusively the Dodge Challenger R/Ts and SRTs.

I don't see a way large cars can evolve to continue. Like the muscle car, they too might have to go away for a decade before we can appreciate them enough for them to return.

Australia kept the spirit of the muscle cars alive while we were obsessed with SUVs and FWD. Maybe China can keep large family cars alive for is awhile until one of the big 3 in the future decides to say "WTH" and start selling them here.
 
#127 ·
Or..... Melange.....
 
#7 ·
IMHO it is more government "meddling" and keeping up with the joneses that is killing the large car

with out CAFE numbers acting as a dis incentive for makers to sell large sedans cheaply and SUV's being trucks do NOT have the same standard for FE the makers have NOT put much EFFORT in to there LARGE cars and have priced then as such a mid sized SUV is actually cheaper
back in the large sedan times a BIG car from CHEVY or FORD was NOT more money then a "import compact" and is today a Impala OR Charger was available for $18K to about 30K I think the sales would be a LOT stronger but as it is MOST SUV's are LESS then an Impala
 
#15 ·
Rather than all of the conspiracy theories, how about this..................... CUV's are just more versatile.

Try putting one of the non flat screen 32 inch TV's in a full size car. Try putting a boxed dishwasher in one. I have stuffed more big boxy things in a Mazda Tribute, than you could ever put in a large sedan. Hell, I can put 4 stock 20" wheels and tires in my Explorer (35" tall, overall). Try doing that in a full size car.

Plus ingress and egress is just so much easier. It is at your level. It has nothing to do with obesity or anything like that. It is just easier and more convenient. This means something when you are in and out all the time doing all of the things that you end up doing when you have a young teenager.

There is no mystery why the full size sedan is selling less and less. Frankly, the mystery to me is how it has taken so long.
 
#16 ·
I remember reading, many years ago, an interview with Giorgetto Giugiaro. He was asked what the car-of-the-future would be or look like. He thought for a moment and then said "They will be taller".
 
#48 ·
Large sedans have already morphed in a number of ways. Today's large cars are only marginally more spacious than midsize cars, which have gotten far, far larger today than they were 20 years ago. Put a 1995 Accord next to a 2015 Accord. :eek: So the size difference is not significant, and that probably discourages some people from paying "up" for a supposed large sedan while they could instead spend similar money on the trendier crossover options. As has been said, the biggest factor though is the practicality of SUVs, and I think ultimately it means that fullsize sedans won't be back. Muscle cars and larger coupes were mentioned too. Coupes have yet to come back, (though they could perhaps; if cars become more niche then coupes will make up higher percentages of sales as people wanting the style of a car will also opt for coupes in some instances). There wasn't really anywhere for them to go so they are gone now. Large sedans, in my estimation, will continue to decline in number of offerings. Companies are already going to work to make them more appealing to younger people, such as the latest Avalon. The Taurus is instead looking to China, and I wonder if future Impalas will as well. Chrysler's pair have been cool for years already, so they have it figured out these days (but the next 300 needs to really step it up). The Korean pair already remain Korea-centric in scope, or at least non-NA-centric. As for the LaCrosse, aside from its rear seat there's not much "large car" about it. It's more ES/MKZ than large sedan. JMO


Completely true. But for many, they'd just take an SUV and be done with it than go around renting other vehicles.
 
#18 · (Edited)
So, if the CUVs own the ease of ownership and versatility elements of 'big vehicle', maybe its time to try to go after something a bit more emotional in a car. A larger car can offer a wonderful canvas for design. Witness some of the classic GM cars -- the '65 Impala or the first generation Toronado. A big, low car can have a ton of presence and the size can allow some interesting design while still allowing for acceptable room. Maybe someone should so a striking big car with acceptable usability. After all, it seems like a lot of buyers don't care that the Chrysler 300 is RWD -- they just like the way it looks.

Rather than a boring four door sedan, how about a big coupe (two or four door) or -- (gasp) even a big convertible? Something dramatic with presence. I won't sell in Camry (or Equinox) numbers, but people may pay a premium for a great looking big car. Doesn't need to be a 400 hp muscle machine. Just a great looking, decent driving big car in the tradition of some of the aforementioned GM cars.
 
#22 ·
In the cities real estate is expensive, parking is limited and parking spots are tight. Even if you love large cars and I do as I previously owned a Chevrolet Caprice and Cadillac Seville, you really can't own one because even if you have a house with a garage, when driving to the city you are SOL.

In rural areas they drive pickups. Because truck nuts just don't go with a full size car.

So the market dried up.
 
#40 · (Edited)
I just don't get the appeal of big cars. I'd love to have a 1966 Cadillac just because, but any new fullsize car ? I'd be happy with a BMW 3 size car, I'd still get that size of car if it was the same price as a bigger one...
Even things like bigger trunk, are essentially useless... the small car has enough space for normal things, and when I want to transport something big, the big car is too small and I'd need a pickup truck or a trailer...

In the cities real estate is expensive, parking is limited and parking spots are tight. Even if you love large cars and I do as I previously owned a Chevrolet Caprice and Cadillac Seville, you really can't own one because even if you have a house with a garage, when driving to the city you are SOL.

In rural areas they drive pickups. Because truck nuts just don't go with a full size car.

So the market dried up.
I don't even know if that's true

My old 1968 house with double garage, it was 18 feet wide 23 feet long, with dual doors. I think of something like a contemporary Olds 98 and can't
imagine how you'd squeak one in there and still manage to get into the house from the interior door.

Looking at new constructions in the suburbs of, say, Toronto, with half-million dollar townhouses with single garages, no way something like an Impala would be able to open the driver's door, and the outdoor driveways are like 15 or 17 feet long from door to sidewalk...



 
#26 ·
People have gotten accustomed to the ease of ingress and egress of SUV's and CUV's. Plus they are easier to load cargo and groceries than a full-sized sedan. There is also the ride height that has puts everyone up in a command position to see better while driving down the road. It's difficult for most people to switch back to a car once they have owned an SUV. I used to have a Ford Escape and it was the most practical useful vehicle that I ever had.

I'm in the market for a car as soon as possible. I am thinking about a large used sedan because they are affordable, reliable and reasonable to repair. Maybe a used Impala at this point, I am not sure.
 
#27 ·
The original article did not list the Chrysler 300 and the Dodge Charger that are holding their own.

It is not fair, IMHO, to include the Buick Lacrosse since a new model is coming out later this year. The Taurus is just old and needs to be revamped. I think the Impala is awesome, but when was the last time you saw an ad for one? Chevy needs to up the marketing on it.
 
#75 ·
The original article did not list the Chrysler 300 and the Dodge Charger that are holding their own.
I think that the relatively strong sales of the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger (2014 – 147,481) is a combination of appealing designs and strongly tapping into affordable rwd sedan market. Which they really have all to themselves. (Along with the sporting/heritage segment as well.)

I’ve always wondered if the current Impala was on a rwd platform, if the sales numbers would have been much better.
 
#31 ·
While less people are buying full sized cars today, I think that is also a product
of government CAFE discouraging them in favor of larger Utilities and trucks.

It's as though the government is still stuck in 1978 and sees large cars as the
main culprits of poor fuel economy and smog generators yet gives large trucks
and Utilities almost a free pass to keep going where large cars are hitting the wall.
 
#33 ·
While less people are buying full sized cars today, I think that is also a product of government CAFE discouraging them in favor of larger Utilities and trucks.
It's as though the government is still stuck in 1978 and sees large cars as the main culprits of poor fuel economy and smog generators yet gives large trucks and Utilities almost a free pass to keep going where large cars are hitting the wall.
Wrong. It was an indirect effect, realizing that trucks were larger, heavier, had commercial uses, and got worse fuel economy, the Govt set lower standards. They didn't expect people to move to larger vehicles, truck-based, but expected cars to become somewhat smaller and much more fuel efficient. They also didn't expect higher oil and natural gas production or a second Great Depression to hold down gasoline prices, keeping people in larger Vehicles.
 
#39 ·
IMO it comes down to a combination of things:

-CUVs are more versatile and you can get a quality CUV at the same price you could a large sedan.

-Midsize sedans are dramatically more fuel efficient than full size sedans, and they really don't give up much in terms of space (in the case of Taurus vs. Fusion...Fusion actually feels larger). Today's mid sizers are plenty big. In some cases too big.

-The movement to sportier handling. People don't want floaty anymore. If you're getting a car you want "European handling." Comfort is for CUVs.

-PRICE. If I'm shopping price points more than I am overall size of the vehicle, I could get a nicely equipped 328i for the same price of a loaded Impala or Taurus. That's insane.
 
#42 ·
Don't see the full size car going extinct and expect sales to be more in the 50,000 to 100,000 annual rate in the future.

Not big numbers, but certainly not "going extinct" ones.

Large cars can be developed from mid-size cars as well as mid-size and large Cross-Overs so they do not require unique architectures.

Large cars may not have the versatility of a Cross-over but do get better MPG and handle better. My Dad recently rented a Buick Encore while his Impala was being repaired due to an icy road collision and he got 26 MPG in the Encore opposed to his usual 23-24 MPG from the Impala and found the Encore "Cramped and under powered".

Full Size cars offer more space than mid-size cars for not much of a price premium or difference in MPG and where a savvy manufacture can create a profitable niche for it's full size offering. The cost difference between a mid-size car and full size one is not much and a shared power train will result in minor differences in performance/MPG but the larger car can command a higher price and thus a higher profit per sale.

As mentioned by another poster, full size cars longer length allow more dramatic styling that can result in higher sales and higher profits since the full size car will be more desirable without much of a penalty in MPG with the extra space and styling offsetting the price difference.
 
#54 ·
To me the biggest reason to get a full size car, which I plan to buy, is the width of the rear seat. I have 3 kids and need something reasonably fuel efficient that they don't mind riding side by side on longer trips. They are fine in the Cruze for up to an hour or two. They will even suffer that way for 5 hours. GM makes nothing with a good center head rest and a large trunk. The Lacrosse is a fine back seat with a mediocre fixed center head rest but a tiny trunk. The Impala has a big trunk but no center head rest. I might just buy an older Cadillac DTS with poor mileage but because they cost so little used, might come ahead anyways. Or leave GM.
 
#56 ·
This isn't too much of a mystery to me, the main reasons are what others have said previously:

-Midsized crossover are just better, for the money. A mid sized crossover/suv often gives you as much, if not more of a feeling of space than a large sedan. They are also more comfortable for most people and easier to get in and out of.

-Many Mid sized are are very close in size to the full sizers, and are often much less expensive and more economical. In the past (a decade or two ago) the full sizer gave you a better chance of seating 6 (or maybe 7 if you could fit 4 kids in the backseat) than a mid sizer...but just about all Full sizers are now 5 seaters, just like the mid-sizers.

I think there are many reasons for the decline in full sizers...but Price for what you are getting is the primary reason. It just doesn't make sense to pay so much more for a full sizer for most people than it does a crossover or mid-sizer.
 
#57 ·
If one thinks of the BOF large Detroiters as the end of an era, that can be blamed on GM and Ford. As far as I know Chrysler was done with the traditional large segment by the 80s but by the 90s the GM and Ford cars were getting aged. The 1991 redo of the Caprice pretty much sealed the deal, just as it did for its Buick and Olds platform mates. Ford went on for a while with the Panthers of course, but in spite of some updates and redoes they continued looking more and more out of step with contemporary sedans, many of which were considerably smaller yet offered comparable space in most areas (other than three across, which most people needing that kind of space were probably looking at minivans in the 80s and 90s, and from the 90s onwards to SUVs). Ford had a chance with the 1998s and then again with the 2003s to do something about it, but about the most interesting out of all of those was the 03-04 Marauder. Far, far too little too late. So the smaller unibody large sedans assumed the role of the large mainstream sedans, and even at this point we're having a conversation about their decline. Toyota realized several years ago that the Avalon was getting too "old" in its appeal and went in a different direction with the last redesign, which has been a great success.
 
#58 ·
I hope not. I have a thing for large sleek well designed sedans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ed Arcuri
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top