New GM CUV planning to take on the Honda Ridgeline
Inside Line has got the, ummm, inside line on Chevrolet's future CUV offerings, and the big news is that GM's suppliers are saying a "crossover pickup" is in the cards. A four-door crew cab version in the same vein as the Honda Ridgeline is planned with both a sizable bed and an all-wheel-drive option.
In addition, the Equinox will be redesigned for 2010, receiving a bit more length to accommodate seven passengers atop the Theta-Epsilon platform, while the eight-passenger Chevy Traverse based on the Lambda platform will fill the hole left by the exiting Uplander.
A smaller CUV built off the Gamma platform still hasn't been approved, but if all goes according to plan, it'll be built in Lordstown, Ohio or Mexico and should go on sale sometime in 2012.
[Source: Inside Line]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Joe K. 4:40PM (10/05/2007)
Way to keep your focus on being number one by sticking to your core competencies, GM! Seriously, when you face mounting challenges from Toyota's Tacoma and other mid-size trucks, why take on the smallest of your competition? This make no strategic sense...
What will be interesting to see is how many General Fans that bashed the hell out of the Ridgeline for being moronic in nature (I mean seriously a unibody truck?!) now support the notion as strong brand strategy, market preservation and general green car coolness... Worthless concept, worthless idea, worthless strategy... Build me the best damn truck for the category, because thats what you are capable of GM, do not explore a small market segment you have little experience in that will not pay back in profits. All this screams is deep deep incentives for both the Colorado/Canyon and this vehicle when neither of them sell due to market cannibalization and buyer confusion.
Reply
CJ 5:56PM (10/05/2007)
I bashed the Ridgeline. I will bash this if GM actually does it. The one saving grace is it can't be any worse looking than a Ridgeline, unless they give it an Aztek front clip.
SPG 5:58PM (10/05/2007)
I could not agree any more.
psarhjinian 8:25PM (10/05/2007)
A unibody truck is not necessarily a bad idea, especially for light-duty contractors. You see a (much) smaller version of this quite commonly in Europe in the Piaggio Ape.
The problem with the Ridgeline isn't the concept, but the execution. The styling is odd and the truck is just too big. Slimmed down a little (think Element with a bed) it would work quite well. Of course, if someone could make a smaller pickup--BoF or unibody--it would be a good thing. The current crop is much too large.
I agree that it'll be funny to see GM fans defending this.
Joe K. 10:21PM (10/05/2007)
psarhjinian,
I've cooled down a bit since I wrote my comments so I will say that a unibody pickup may have its place as a run-about. However, GM seems to have the body on frame game down, why move against it. Even the little trucks are more stout with the BoF. I have long envisioned the return of the true small truck. I know that crash ratings are making it ever tougher to truly produce the mini-truck here in this country, but i could see a well executed 2WD (And by that I mean RWD) that has two seats with a more upright cab so taller guys can get in, but the truck would turn out no larger than a compact car the bed being the size of the back seat and trunk (maybe with a little more over hang back there. I think the Mileage and versatility of a tiny truck like that low on options with a price point that is so far below every other bloated compa...err Mid-size truck on the market....
G-Daddy 4:56PM (10/05/2007)
I'd rather see a Colorado-based Avalanche equivalent; something that would offer the option of having a crew cab or a full-length bed, be small enough to drive/park in town, and get decent gas mileage versus a full-sized vehicle (that isn't a minivan).
Reply
Bananas 5:08PM (10/05/2007)
The benefit for GM is that they own the copyright and are able to use the midgate on any vehicle they choose. A smaller variant of the Avalanche with a midgate would be really awesome. Think about it for a minute. The versatility of the AV, but at a smaller size so better MPG etc. More people would buy one if they had the choice. I have an AV, and love it, but too many people look at it and wished they could do what I do but with a smaller ride.
Go GM!!!
G-Daddy 6:14PM (10/05/2007)
And maybe throw in a diesel engine too, for that matter, for even better fuel economy/towing power.
As much as I like the idea of importing the Holden Ute (mainly for nostalgic El Camino reasons), I think a Colorado/Avalanche combo would be more appealing and practical for the added passenger space and real hauling/towing ability. It'd also be expanding an existing line versus importing a totally different vehicle, which would mean less dollars spent from an advertising standpoint.
MoonRover 6:16PM (10/05/2007)
That is exactly with this will be, a smaller avalanche.
Lad 5:03PM (10/05/2007)
Another bunch of PR Hype about SUVs. GM thinks by renaming the SUV a new name, CUV, that will draw "the great unwashed" back to buy more gas guzzling dinosaurs. And you know what? It will and that's the sad part of it. Their process of spending money on lawyers, lobbyist and Madison Avenue, instead of R&D, has worked for years on the "under-knowledgeable."
Reply
Papi L-Gee 5:31PM (10/05/2007)
There is absolutely no need to compete with everything out there, ESPECIALLY the ugly and less-than-useful Ridgeline.
All the GM vehicle will do is validate the Honda.
Reply
Anti-believer 5:07PM (10/05/2007)
Ridgeline, Sportrac, etc.
Reply
Kevin 5:47PM (10/05/2007)
Good luck GM. I love my Ridgeline. It is actually a mini-avalanche, I will agree with that comment. But the reliability and the ride and the manuverability are exceptionally HONDA.
Reply
buckbuck 12:40AM (11/28/2007)
GM ties to be everything for everybody. get back to what you wee doing in the late 40s and early 50s. Chevys base, pontiac and buicks next, olds near the top, and caddy on top! Dont build the same cars with 5 different names , pick two or three companys to make a car, and build it to their standards.Stop trying to be everything to everybody!!!!!
Reply
SPG 6:01PM (10/05/2007)
More CUV's and some moronic CUV pickup?
Enough with the CUV's. From every company for that matter.
In 1996 Ford offered what? Two SUV's?
The Explorer sold over 600,000 copies that year alone. If the market never got overly saturated and each company had only like two SUV/CUV's then automakers would still be making lots of auto's!
Reply
CJ 6:10PM (10/05/2007)
Whats with all the stretching to accomodate three rows? Just buy a freaking bigger car! I'm in the middle of the home auto livery cycle and it drives me nuts watching what I will have to choose from in a few years.
Reply
rjmhotrod 6:19PM (10/05/2007)
Which bigger car should we buy? A minivan? MPG's suck too much and I've had a minivan for 6 years now. Large SUV? Again, no thanks. We're trying to get a vehicle that's a bit smaller and more fuel efficient and will seat 7 people (occasionally). A "stretched" CUV fits the bill nicely. What I would have rather had was a nice big wagon though.
psarhjinian 8:32PM (10/05/2007)
Wel, instead of an SUV-with-the-edges-filed-off, what about the likes of the Mazda5 or Kia Rondo?
They seat seven in a pinch, get good fuel economy and aren't behemoths by any stretch. Vote with your wallet and maybe we'll see a C-Max, Stream or Touran in a few years.
rjmhotrod 9:59PM (10/05/2007)
I have 2 quotes sitting in my inbox as we speak for the Kia Rondo. I spent a good bit of time test driving it and I do believe it's going to be our next vehicle.
rjmhotrod 6:14PM (10/05/2007)
I'm happy to hear GM is adding 7 passenger seating to the Equinox. This is exactly the type of vehicle my wife and I are looking at to replace our minivan. Too bad this isn't an option until 2010!
Reply