Buick Ponders Another Crossover, CBS Showed It to Us First

[nsap]

Buick Ponders Another Crossover, CBS Showed It to Us First
A TE based crossover for Buick is not yet green-lighted.
www.gminsidenews.com
June 22, 2009
By: Nsap

Last week during a spot on the CBS Early Show regarding the future of General Motors, they showed a GM design studio that was showcasing a clay model of a future vehicle. It was obvious that the clay model was of an upcoming Buick vehicle and it appeared to be a crossover. GMI has since confirmed what that proposed design is of and the status of the vehicle itself.

Firstly, it is a Buick model, but it is NOT the next-generation Enclave like some have speculated. GM has been kicking around the idea of building a Buick crossover on the Theta-Epsilon platform. This is the same platform that underpins the all-new Cadillac SRX. The clay model from the CBS spot is a design study of Buick's possible TE crossover. The shown design is not that of anything final, simply a study of the possible design direction of the car.

The wrinkle in this is that the TE-based Buick crossover has NOT been green-lighted for production as of yet. The GM Product Board is still pondering on the idea of it. GMI has been told that their hang-up with it is that they fear Buick will have too many crossovers in the Chinese market and that they will compete with each other. Buick is about to replace their GL8 model, which is a minivan-like vehicle with a MPV based on the Opel Zafira. Their fear is that the new MPV and a TE crossover would be too similar. It should be noted that the North American market is not going to be getting the Zafira-based Buick. That vehicle will remain exclusive to the Chinese market.

A decision regarding the Buick TE crossover is expected fairly soon. Stick with GMInsidenews for the latest. We will also be hearing more regarding the upcoming Buick Regal soon!

[wescoent]

So again... what's the difference between Buick and Cadillac if they INSIST on having mechanically identical vehicles that target the same customers?

[TAMark]

The new GM. Same stupid management. More badge engineering and redundancy.

[nsap]

Originally Posted by TAMark

The new GM. Same stupid management. More badge engineering and redundancy.

Did you see the clay model? It doesn't even look remotely like the SRX...hell people thought it was an Enclave!

Platform sharing is always going to happen. It has to.

[FenwickHockey65]

New Rendezvous?

[TakuZaKyousei]

Originally Posted by nsap

Did you see the clay model? It doesn't even look remotely like the SRX...hell people thought it was an Enclave!

Platform sharing is always going to happen. It has to.

I agree. And to those that oppose this way of thinking I ask:


How is this a redo of the SRX when all they would share is underpinnings?

Where does the mentality come from that GM is crazy for having platform sharing while other companies do the same and get no flack?

Why is ot not a successful way of doing things when we have consistently seen evidence that platform sharing, even in the most recognizable situations, has proving extremely positive and profitable?

The GMTs and the Lambdas are prime examples. The Escalade certainly has not been a sales disappointment just because it blatantly mimics many aspects of the Tahoe/Yukon. As long as Cadillac models have unique styling, more upscale options and technology, including more powerful engines, I see no harm, while certainly giving GM maximum profit on their investment. This would have been a Saab anyway, why not make it a Buick since GM will no longer own Saab?

[wescoent]

Yet you have TWO similarly sized crossovers targeting the same customer at the same price point!

The Buick Rendezvous-2 and Cadillac SRX are both targeting the RX350! Why not just have ONE really good crossover to target it? Why compromise either the Buick or the Cadillac?

The OLD SRX targeting the BMW X5 and Mercedes ML350, and in theory, a TE Buick would target the RX350. This makes sense, because they're at two different price points and two distinct customers groups.

This is INSANELY wasteful. The Sloan Ladder WORKS, but GM refuses to follow its OWN business plan!

[SS3]

Originally Posted by TakuZaKyousei

I agree. And to those that oppose this way of thinking I ask:


How is this a redo of the SRX when all they would share is underpinnings?

Where does the mentality come from that GM is crazy for having platform sharing while other companies do the same and get no flack?

Why is ot not a successful way of doing things when we have consistently seen evidence that platform sharing, even in the most recognizable situations, has proving extremely positive and profitable?

The GMTs and the Lambdas are prime examples. The Escalade certainly has not been a sales disappointment just because it blatantly mimics many aspects of the Tahoe/Yukon. As long as Cadillac models have unique styling, more upscale options and technology, including more powerful engines, I see no harm, while certainly giving GM maximum profit on their investment. This would have been a Saab anyway, why not make it a Buick since GM will no longer own Saab?

Same old GM thinking. Platform sharing has NOT been profitable at GM. How on earth do the create a market segment for Cadillac if Buick is going to be poaching their customer base? Does GM want Buick or Cadillac targeting Lexus?

[nsap]

Originally Posted by SS3

Same old GM thinking. Platform sharing has NOT been profitable at GM. How on earth do the create a market segment for Cadillac if Buick is going to be poaching their customer base? Does GM want Buick or Cadillac targeting Lexus?

Buick should be the one targeting Lexus. Cadillac should be going after BMW and Mercedes.

[TakuZaKyousei]

Originally Posted by wescoent

Yet you have TWO similarly sized crossovers targeting the same customer at the same price point!

The Buick Rendezvous-2 and Cadillac SRX are both targeting the RX350! Why not just have ONE really good crossover to target it? Why compromise either the Buick or the Cadillac?

The OLD SRX targeting the BMW X5 and Mercedes ML350, and in theory, a TE Buick would target the RX350. This makes sense, because they're at two different price points and two distinct customers groups.

This is INSANELY wasteful. The Sloan Ladder WORKS, but GM refuses to follow its OWN business plan!

Actually I have to call you on that one. Despite what you may have heard every vehicle on the market targets each other. In fact one could easily say that the Lexus LX570 and the GX470 are competitors. I will ultimately say that the Mercedes GLK and ML are competitors.

Now I will also point out that every review I have seen of the new SRX has compared it to the performance abilities of the Germans with RWD. I have yet to read one in fact, that doesn't mention that the Cadillac SRX seems to be geared towards an enthusiast crowd, both AWD and FWD versions.

All Buick need do is gear the "Rendezvous" to a more soft suspension setting to differentiate the ride for those who care in the first place. The very fact that the Enclave and GMC Acadia sell in the same showroom, side by side, and very successfully I might add, is reason enough to believe that this could certainly work, and remain within their own brand identities.

[Quickening]

Ugh. And both will be lacking the technology that is truly needed to compete. SRX needs to move to AWD only, such as the Escalade to help differentiate.

[ByTheLake]

Originally Posted by TAMark

The new GM. Same stupid management. More badge engineering and redundancy.

Platform-sharing is not badge engineering.

Does anybody complain that the Toyota Camry and Lexus ES have shared a platform for 5 generations now? The Honda Accord and Acura TSX are platform twins, too.

If the Buick version has distinct sheet metal and styling, and Cadillac maintains some unique features, I see no need for concern.

[TakuZaKyousei]

Originally Posted by nsap

Buick should be the one targeting Lexus. Cadillac should be going after BMW and Mercedes.

Precisely. This RWD vs FWD stuff is getting old. Especially since AWD is now able to be programmed within the configuration to be "sporty" or soft. As long as the Cadillac brand retains the more "Sporty" suspension and we don;t start getting "Super" version of the Buicks then I think the philosophy will be safe.

I also believe that people should realize that their is not a major automaker around that has a multi-brand portfolio that doesn't run the risk of these confusions. Where it truly gets bad is when you see a Honda Accord sitting next to a Acura TSX. These cars literally share everything with each other with exception to minuscule differences in styling. Cadillac has maintained a perfect balance in these matters and I have yet to see recent situations where they boggled up the duties of their vehicles. Even the Escalade the most evident culprit of badge engineering in the line-up pulls of the transition pretty nicely. The XLR and Corvette, for example, were perfect platform sharers where most people simply had no clue of a relation.

[TakuZaKyousei]

Originally Posted by Quickening

Ugh. And both will be lacking the technology that is truly needed to compete. SRX needs to move to AWD only, such as the Escalade to help differentiate.

Originally Posted by ByTheLake

Platform-sharing is not badge engineering.

Does anybody complain that the Toyota Camry and Lexus ES have shared a platform for 5 generations now? The Honda Accord and Acura TSX are platform twins, too.

If the Buick version has distinct sheet metal and styling, and Cadillac maintains some unique features, I see no need for concern.

Many simply don't see that the consumer could care less. Just like dating, Looks normally when out in the beginning, then you fall in love with the insides.
The SRX is gorgeous, and if this Buick looks anything like the Enclave it will be as well. A test drive, badge, and a look at the price tag of either will make the decision for 90% of the buyers.

Anyone hating on this creation, but is tolerant of the Audi configurations is a hypocrite. It seems that many of those Audi advocates dismiss the fact that their mass sells have FWD/AWD layouts. The A4, A6, and even sport TT are examples.

[Dr. Show-Me]

Where I think some of the confusion comes from is the difference between badge engineering and platform sharing.
GM got in trouble with people because of badge engineering, not platform sharing. When they stuck a Cadillac badge on a Cavalier, it didn't make it a Cadillac, but rather a Cavalier with a Cadillac badge. With proper platform sharing - that is, sharing unseen components that do not differentiate vehicles but enhance production - you can produce different styled vehicles that more closely target the buyers they are trying to reach. Platform sharing that allows more efficient factory utilization is good platform sharing.
So Remember: [b]Badge engineering BAD Discreet platform sharing GOOD![/B]