Anyway back to the OP, I understand and almost can see the hypothetical conversation between the design team and the beancounters. It's evident throughout the range from the Cruze to the CT6.
Like I mentioned previously, on Enclave, probably one of the most attractive CUVs on the road, there is some cost cutting prevalent throughout the interior...for example:
The tilt w/ carseat in place 2nd row captain's chairs...only the passenger side has this functionality.
On the CT6:
There's just something weird about the leather patch around the nav screen...it's almost as if it were designed from jump to be larger and at the last second forced to use the corporate 8.4" screen.
I remember somewhere on the forum a while back during the CT6/7 design phase it was mentioned that there was some disagreement over what door handles should be used to save a few cents per unit...it seems that throughout the company this same mindset is taking control again.
Also to this pervasive mantra of the Blazer being expensive. The auto rags were mostly given loaded V6 Premier and RS Blazers to test drive and review, those trims do go up to near $50k. Who in the buying public is going to buy a Chevrolet Blazer at 48k/50k? One can get a nicely optioned V6 cloth Blazer for much less than the top trims. I know people are pissed that this CUV has the storied Blazer name from the full sized two door BoF SUV of yore, but come on! These auto journalists need to ease up on the bias!
I find it sad that some people wish for GM to fail and can't comprehend any good news. A plausible explanation for this kind of behavior is that you have a miserable life so you wish the same to others. Cory Pham, Autoblog Poster
GM must return its divisions to being interdependent entities within the corporation. Decentralize and free the different divisions talents to foster brand differentiation and customer loyalty.
Its not lying, its using their own internal standards instead of generally accepted industry standards, this is rampant in the industry, that is for example why , GM, Ford and Chrysler went to SAE certified towing standards for advertised max tow rating, due to previous wild claims...
Same thing happens in Engines.
A review is made up of two pieces, fact and opinion. Facts are hp, wheelbase length and other measurable dimensions and results. Styling and driving enjoyment are opinions, quality of materials is partially fact and opinion. Quality of materials can be partially measured by cost of the materials, but just because a material costs a lot doesn't mean it is quality, or it can cost a lot but the presentation of it can impact its appearance of quality. And how "expensive" something feels is certainly an opinion.
I think most of us have read several reviews of the Blazer, all of the one's I've read have been pleased by the handling and V6 performance. As a result, I have to throw out this guys negative opinion in this area as an outlier.
As far as the materials, I have read a few complaints with the Blazer and GM certainly has a long history of complaints for cheaping out. I suspect to an extent his opinion is shaded by GM's history, he went in looking for the areas GM cheaped out. Were he to think the Blazer was a Toyota, would he have "found" all of this cheapness? I haven't driven a Blazer, but I have sat in one and did not walk away feeling like the interior was the epitome of cheap. I think his impression is based on expectations of cheapness fed by a few real examples of cheapness in the interior.
With that said, GM needs to go above and beyond to shake this "cheap interior" image, they can't just be competitive with the poor image they've earned.
And, he is basing his opinion on the materials at the $50k price point. There is already $2k on the hood, how much longer until there is $5k on the hood? Meaning that is the quality of the interior in-line with what people will actually be paying vs. this mythical $50k price that no one other than a few early adapters will pay?
It is why an L84 5.3L is only 355 hp and 383 ft/lbs with 11.0 Comp. Ratio and a 2018+ 5.0L Coyote is 395 hp and 400 ft/lbs with 12.0 Comp. Ratio.
Smaller Displacement but more Compression ='s "Better"
Never watch "This Is Spinal Tap?" Imagine if their Amp went to 12!
I see the GM fanboi squad is in full force on this one. What a surprise lol.
It's funny I didn't read this article at first but I heard it from a customer in Honda showroom while I was showing a new Passport today.
2019 Honda Accord Sport
Are you sure the Decimal is in the right place?
12.0-1 vs 11.0-1 is only about compressing 12 measurements (lets say cups) of air into a 1 cup space. Verses 11 cups of air into a 1 cup space (displacement being equal). Where did the 1 cup go?
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)