2021 MCE Chevrolet Traverse, photo credit: General Motors
General Motors has postponed plans to freshen at least a handful of vehicles — including the Chevrolet Traverse, Buick Enclave and Cadillac XT4 — during the coronavirus pandemic, according to LMC Automotive.
"Most face-lifts appear to have some delay associated with them, especially those that hadn't really been fully completed. Where they were essentially getting ready for production, we aren't seeing any delays there," said Jeff Schuster, senior vice president of forecasting with LMC Automotive. "Nothing that I'm aware of at this point has been outright canceled."
So far, GM has postponed a face-lift for the 2021 Buick Enclave to the 2022 model year. A freshening of the Cadillac XT4 for the 2022 model year also was delayed, to the 2023 model year, LMC said.
A GM spokesman in March said updates to the Chevy Bolt, Traverse and Equinox for the 2021 model year would be pushed to 2022.
GM is prioritizing new and redesigned models over freshened vehicles "because for most of those, a lot of the work has already been done, meaning the cost has already been absorbed in many cases. And you get more bang out of a redesign," Schuster said.
A top executive confirmed last week that some programs would be delayed as a result of the crisis but would not say which ones.
"How long they're delayed is somewhat a function of the recovery process and what that might look like," Barry Engle, president of GM North America, told Automotive News.
Pickups and SUVs "are obviously very important to us in terms of volume and share as well as profitability," he added. "The other programs that we consider sacred are our electric vehicle programs."
That's an interesting statement in these times of $1.99 gasoline and massive pickup sales. Is GM worried about Tesla or just preparing for the inevitable?
Speaking as an OE supplier, I suspect it has to do a lot more with the logistics of the component/parts supply chain.
Lets not pretend a new vehicle is cheaper to launch, than a MCE.
A MCE is typically the same suppliers making the same parts, and the ones that changed are a "running change" of sorts, this is a lot less likely when a new platform is involved.
Let's say hypothetically, that "Supplier A" makes a part for the K2XX SUV, they built-out and ended part production months ago, probably around January or February, "Supplier B" started production in November or December and was fully ramped-up in the first part of Q1 (before all the lock-downs). The option of building the K2XX SUV's, doesn't really exist, build-out of remaining parts, is all that can really be done.
Given that probably 1/2 to 3/4 of all profit is derived from the triplets and the Sierra/Silverado, how is this surprising. The triplets were due out in fall, and they have to do it. Trucks needed an interior refresh and was planned for 2022 and I imagine will be in 2022 MY. They will simply borrow what was done for Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon. EV's are still in development phase so probably easier to keep doing engineering from home. Why is anyone surprised by this?
The other "Sacred" program is electricks? More like a sacred cow.
I'll admit that Tesla has carved out a SMALL yet not too profitable niche selling expensive EVs, but the re-charging infrastructure is pathetic. If you want to get the un varnished truth, look at TFL-Trucks experience trying to tow with a Model X . Really basic things we take for granted like driving across country and/or towing simply aren't practicable in an EV.
The Bolt is an example of arriving early but not on-time. It's the wrong vehicle for the segment, it's very low on desirability and value and was designed within the limitations of the tech at time. Their view on BEV customers has also changed in the interim. No longer an eco compliance customer, these are people paying a premium for performance, tech, and desirability. The Bolt is a pretty good illustration on how wrong every other automaker has been on the segment and it really needed Tesla to get it right and point the way. It seems obvious now.
If I remember my history, those automakers that were first out with new product did much better than those that were slow after WWII.
I'm not comparing the virus to a war, but speaking of the depressed economic situation common to both.
Not really. Any manufacturer could and did sell even warmed over model they could build to a public that had been cut off from new cars for several years. Even Crosley sold record numbers and the market wasn't sated till about 1950.
Dont understand the mentality of no refresh on the Traverse and Enclave as I have a '18 Traverse and was anticipating the '21 when my lease is up with refresh; now will look at another options including the Kia/Hyundai twins
If you want a 3rd Row that your kids will eventually age out of, get the H/K. Outside of the $70k full sizers, you're not going to find the space you currently have elsewhere.
Automakers should understand that all EVs are "economy" cars, so to make an EV that looks like one is a pointless exercise.
GM gets that now with the Hummer. Now, lets see what else they do.
I'll never quite understand GM's EV thinking. It was a new and expensive technology, why would't you start with your high end brand and work your way down as things get cheaper. You know, like with any other new technology.....
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
GM Inside News Forum
3.5M posts
83.7K members
Since 2003
A forum community dedicated to GM owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about General Motors news, concepts, releases, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!