New York Auto Show: 85 FFV SUVs make a scene outside show

[asim]

I don't know if this is a repost or not...but here it is.

New York Auto Show: 85 FFV SUVs make a scene outside show

The sight of 85 Tahoes triple-parked in Manhattan is one to behold. GM parked the fleet of flex-fuel SUVs in front of the Javits center today to make a green scene before they're picked up and driven off to various New York dealerships. The group also contains the first ten flex-fuel Suburbans off of the production line.

It's a strange world we live in when a group of 85 illegally-parked SUVs in Manhattan are supposed to be a statement on behalf of the environment.



Source: http://www.autoblog.com/2006/04/13/n...e-outside-show

[TahoeMikeZ71]

I'll take two Tahoe's.

[superstreet]

nice

[Ming]

While I see GM's intent, and I applaud the advertising of Ethanol FFV's, I can't help but feel frustrated at this latest PR stunt.

GM seems bound and determined to tie its image to that of big SUVs because they are profit cows. They don't seem to get that people who care about this sort of thing (saving the environment, or saving money) still see full-size SUV's as wasteful but instead of wasting gas, they're wasting E-85, which if you've been following the ethanol as a gasoline additive replacing MTBE news recently, you'll know is already in short supply.

A fleet of GM's Flex Fuel Impalas with 31mpg (with gasoline at least, both the Impala and Tahoe would supposedly get less MPG on Ethanol) 3.5LV6s would have been a much better example of an E-85 "green" vehicles than a bunch of SUV's. Or even a mix showing the whole line of FFV's GM makes. But I guess it isn't as sexy (or potentially profitable) to advertise the Flex Fuel Impala and Monte Carlo since they came out a whole half year or more ago....after all, GM makes a point of advertising its just launched vehicles like crazy, and then letting them drop off the map...

While its not quite a marketing blunder, it does make me wonder about how they make these kinds of decisions when a clearly more "green" fleet of Impalas would have driven home the point behind GM's attempts to push this renewable fuel all the more.

This guy who posted at Autoblog seems to get it:

3. Weird. Plainly weird.

Most (some?) enviormentalists seem to be ignorant, and all that they would see would be just huge SUVs... and they'd want them burned down, in the name of everything that is green.

Is it ok if I drink Starbucks?

Posted at 2:01PM on Apr 13th 2006 by Kamil

[free_energy0]

How much energy did they waste to advertise this bad sense of enviro-fashion? I mean, come on, its an overweight ostentatious SUV for insecure men and security moms. Its like advertising filtered low-tar cigarettes to health nuts. GM just doesn't get it sometimes

[CrunkedRL]

This is the kind of publicity GM needs. Now if only we had the infrastructure to help keep up with the ever increasing demand for these vehicles. I live in Columbus, Ohio and there is only one gas station located 30 miles from me that has the capabilities to offer flex fuel.

[RamJet502]

Originally Posted by Ming

A fleet of GM's Flex Fuel Impalas with 31mpg (with gasoline at least, both the Impala and Tahoe would supposedly get less MPG on Ethanol) 3.5LV6s would have been a much better example of an E-85 "green" vehicles than a bunch of SUV's. Or even a mix showing the whole line of FFV's GM makes. But I guess it isn't as sexy (or potentially profitable) to advertise the Flex Fuel Impala and Monte Carlo since they came out a whole half year or more ago....after all, GM makes a point of advertising its just launched vehicles like crazy, and then letting them drop off the map...

I agree, but the SUVs and new trucks are the vehicles that will keep GM from going bankrupt. They need to take priority now.

[RamJet502]

Originally Posted by free_energy0

How much energy did they waste to advertise this bad sense of enviro-fashion? I mean, come on, its an overweight ostentatious SUV for insecure men and security moms. Its like advertising cigarettes to health nuts. GM just doesn't get it sometimes

Have you driven one of these vehicles? They are the best thing since sliced bread. The capability of a pickup with the capacity of a minivan. They are way too expensive for my taste, but they are awesome.

[asim]

Originally Posted by Ming

While I see GM's intent, and I applaud the advertising of Ethanol FFV's, I can't help but feel frustrated at this latest PR stunt.

GM seems bound and determined to tie its image to that of big SUVs because they are profit cows. They don't seem to get that people who care about this sort of thing (saving the environment, or saving money) still see full-size SUV's as wasteful but instead of wasting gas, they're wasting E-85, which if you've been following the ethanol as a gasoline additive replacing MTBE news recently, you'll know is already in short supply.

A fleet of GM's Flex Fuel Impalas with 31mpg (with gasoline at least, both the Impala and Tahoe would supposedly get less MPG on Ethanol) 3.5LV6s would have been a much better example of an E-85 "green" vehicles than a bunch of SUV's. Or even a mix showing the whole line of FFV's GM makes. But I guess it isn't as sexy (or potentially profitable) to advertise the Flex Fuel Impala and Monte Carlo since they came out a whole half year or more ago....after all, GM makes a point of advertising its just launched vehicles like crazy, and then letting them drop off the map...

While its not quite a marketing blunder, it does make me wonder about how they make these kinds of decisions when a clearly more "green" fleet of Impalas would have driven home the point behind GM's attempts to push this renewable fuel all the more.

This guy who posted at Autoblog seems to get it:

Having ALL of GM's lineup of E85 vehicles would have been better.

[63GrandSport001]

Originally Posted by free_energy0

How much energy did they waste to advertise this bad sense of enviro-fashion? I mean, come on, its an overweight ostentatious SUV for insecure men and security moms. Its like advertising cigarettes to health nuts. GM just doesn't get it sometimes

Maybe GM gets it and you along with a few others do not get it.

Point A SUVs make more profits then cars

Point B E-85 vehicles burn less fuel then hybrids do.

You can be a green person and still have your big, and powerful SUV its a win win situation.

[redimpss5]

Diesels are very clean and efficient also, but people whine about them also. Cant seem to please them all is the problem!!

[expyfan]

Really nice. I'll take one Tahoe, so one day I can drive my expy and the next day the Tahoe and compared the two of them.

[free_energy0]

Originally Posted by 63GrandSport001

Maybe GM gets it and you along with a few others do not get it.

Point A SUVs make more profits then cars

Point B E-85 vehicles burn less fuel then hybrids do.

You can be a green person and still have your big, and powerful SUV its a win win situation.

I shouldn't waste my time w/ someone so misinformed, but...

A) Yes they do make more money, but thats not really relavent to the subject of conservation.

B) By fuel I assume (hope) you mean gasoline, but even then you fail to understand that it takes a ton of gasoline to make the ethanol in the first place.

[tosil]

Good for them, yes, there are those who will argue that these big brutes shouldn't be advertised like this, but look at it this way, what needs more help when it comes to the environment and fuel efficiency... a vehicle that already gets 30+mpg, or a big SUV. Same goes for the whole Hybrid argument, GM focused their Hybrid resources on the big truck because it's the big trucks that need the extra help, so what if a Prius is a hybrid, remove the hybrid hardware, and it would still get decent milage. Any effort to reduce or eliminate the need for foreign oil is a good thing...

[stevecmh]

those Tahoes look sweet