[Doc]

Originally Posted by shaffe

You keep saying that, yet the car you are describing is the BRZ and FRS. Entry level performance cars, smaller than the current pony cars. And they are priced in the mid 20s. Those two cars would be the direct comparison for your new pony car segment. I don't know why you keep ignoring that these two cars exist. Yes I know you said distinct American styling, but the segment you say doesn't exists, exists and those cars are not selling well by any means. YTD They have only sold 3800 BRZ and 7700 FR-S combined that is an average of 1277 cars a month


"there are so many buyers here in the U.S. (millions) that a successful model could easily sell 100k+"

That would outsell the camaro, and IMO definitely take sales away from it.

As Doc has mentioned many times, the closest thing GM has to a fun entry car now is the Sonic RS, which starts at 21K. I just can't see how this brand new car, with a better interior could come in less than that.

I just do not see how it could be done, to the point where it wouldn't be right there in price with the Camaro

I don't mention those two cars because they aren't what I'm talking about; those aren't American pony cars, they're Japanese cars that look like Japanese cars and they're advertised as sports cars which means the insurance costs are high. Plus they start at $25k+ which puts them in direct competition with Camaro and Mustang, both of which are kicking their butts sales-wise and for good reason. They're too small and cramped and completely impractical for a new family with 1 or 2 children. A true American pony car will be sporty but not a sports car, thus not have the high insurance associated with a sports car; it will have rear seats that are practical for adults if need be, but definitely for children so a young family can justify buying one.

Yes if what I'm proposing works and is successful it would take away some sales from the bottom end of the Camaro line but not that much, AND that's not a loss dollars-wise because all that sales volume would bring in revenue for GM which is a good thing.

I love Camaro too but it's a good strategy for GM to not just rely on that but broaden their appeal to the entry-level market for long-term survivability. Companies that are plagued with can't-do-it-itis are ripe for being upstaged by somebody else who didn't get the memo that they couldn't do it, so they figured it out anyways. "Think Different" doesn't mean think of all the ways you CAN'T; it means think until you figure out how you CAN. Look at what the Camaro team was able to do once they got the orders from on high to MAKE IT LIGHTER. Think different is a team effort but it has to start at the top.

Oh and I don't recall mentioning "...many times, the closest thing GM has to a fun entry car now is the Sonic RS..." maybe you were thinking of somebody else??

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Doc

I don't mention those two cars because they aren't what I'm talking about; those aren't American pony cars, they're Japanese cars that look like Japanese cars and they're advertised as sports cars which means the insurance costs are high. Plus they start at $25k+ which puts them in direct competition with Camaro and Mustang, both of which are kicking their butts sales-wise and for good reason. They're too small and cramped and completely impractical for a new family with 1 or 2 children. A true American pony car will be sporty but not a sports car, thus not have the high insurance associated with a sports car; it will have rear seats that are practical for adults if need be, but definitely for children so a young family can justify buying one.

Yes if what I'm proposing works and is successful it would take away some sales from the bottom end of the Camaro line but not that much, AND that's not a loss dollars-wise because all that sales volume would bring in revenue for GM which is a good thing.

I love Camaro too but it's a good strategy for GM to not just rely on that but broaden their appeal to the entry-level market for long-term survivability. Companies that are plagued with can't-do-it-itis are ripe for being upstaged by somebody else who didn't get the memo that they couldn't do it, so they figured it out anyways. "Think Different" doesn't mean think of all the ways you CAN'T; it means think until you figure out how you CAN. Look at what the Camaro team was able to do once they got the orders from on high to MAKE IT LIGHTER. Think different is a team effort but it has to start at the top.

Oh and I don't recall mentioning "...many times, the closest thing GM has to a fun entry car now is the Sonic RS..." maybe you were thinking of somebody else??

Lol I think he was crediting you with my post that a Sonic RS was $21,000 while everyone is clamoring for something much "better" for under $20,000.

Love the attitude you profess. And I have no doubt GM could do a really fun car for $24,000 or $25,000. But my point has been simply that such a car would not sell nearly well enough to be profitable or survive.

And if you try for sub $20,000 with decent performance, well that car would be so cheaped out it wouldn't sell either.

If GM had a 30% market share maybe. But at 15 or 16% they don't have the luxury of piling hundreds of millions into a low profit, low volume car.

[Doc]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Lol I think he was crediting you with my post that a Sonic RS was $21,000 while everyone is clamoring for something much "better" for under $20,000.

Love the attitude you profess. And I have no doubt GM could do a really fun car for $24,000 or $25,000. But my point has been simply that such a car would not sell nearly well enough to be profitable or survive.

And if you try for sub $20,000 with decent performance, well that car would be so cheaped out it wouldn't sell either.

If GM had a 30% market share maybe. But at 15 or 16% they don't have the luxury of piling hundreds of millions into a low profit, low volume car.

Hehe okay, thanks for "fessing up"

Well they have done a really fun car for $26k+; it's called a Camaro. But that's the problem; it's priced out of range for the target market I'm talking about. If you're a young new buyer, which sounds better (or even possible) to you? A car payment of $450 a month or $295 a month? And that's before insurance! And again I disagree about "cheaped out". It doesn't cost anymore to draw a great looking exterior/interior than to draw a crappy "cheap" looking one. It's a design problem, not a cost problem. Looks are pretty much everything with what I'm proposing; it has to have that "stop you dead in your tracks" kind of looks. Now imagine the reaction when someone realizes they can get that for about $20k... The BRZ and FR-S don't have that kind of looks (or sales either...what a coincidence).

As for performance...how many Camaro (or even Vette) owners do you think actually take their cars to the track? Maybe 10% or at most 20%? That leaves at least 80% of that customer base that doesn't really need (or will actually use) the performance those cars have....yet they buy them. I don't think performance is the big issue with an entry-level pony car; it will be looks pure and simple.

As for actual performance it has to be "sporty" but it's not a track car; neither road course nor 1/4 mile. It's an around-town, daily driver, occasional trip car. Doesn't need an expensive fancy suspension; leave that to after-market for those who choose to mod their cars. Doesn't need an expensive fancy interior with lots of electronic gizmos; let those who buy them add that later if they want. Metal, plastic and fabrics are fine for the interior, doesn't need leather; the critical factor is the design/style.

When I say pony car, I mean seriously hold to the original pony car philosophy; not a sports car, not a track car, not a 1/4 miler, but it looks like it could be. At a price point even new entry buyers can manage. Perfect for the 80%. Not all of that 80% would buy one of course but what if half do? Or a third or even a quarter? That would be pulling not just from the entry level Camaro, but from Ford, Dodge, Toyota, Honda, Mazda...you get the drift. A genuine, real American pony car that looks like an American car.

GM never will get to 30% market share if they don't think and do something different which of course means taking some risks, but I'd rather see them swinging for the fences instead of sitting huddled in the dugout hoping their 15% doesn't keep eroding away.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by Doc

I don't mention those two cars because they aren't what I'm talking about; those aren't American pony cars, they're Japanese cars that look like Japanese cars and they're advertised as sports cars which means the insurance costs are high. Plus they start at $25k+ which puts them in direct competition with Camaro and Mustang, both of which are kicking their butts sales-wise and for good reason. They're too small and cramped and completely impractical for a new family with 1 or 2 children. A true American pony car will be sporty but not a sports car, thus not have the high insurance associated with a sports car; it will have rear seats that are practical for adults if need be, but definitely for children so a young family can justify buying one.

Yes if what I'm proposing works and is successful it would take away some sales from the bottom end of the Camaro line but not that much, AND that's not a loss dollars-wise because all that sales volume would bring in revenue for GM which is a good thing.


Oh and I don't recall mentioning "...many times, the closest thing GM has to a fun entry car now is the Sonic RS..." maybe you were thinking of somebody else??

Yep in my quick post meant to say Number 3 not you hahah.

Yes they are not american pony cars, however they are EXACTLY what you are trying to say GM should introduce. A 2+2 coupe, smaller than the camaro, that looks sporty. IIRC almost all of the reviews of those cars, complained that they were not sporty enough!

This new pony car you are proposing, it needs to be smaller than the camaro correct? Because IMO if it is the same size it would defeat the purppose. The BRZ and FR-S are smaller than the Camaro. Yet you say those cars are too small and impractical???? How would a smaller American coupe not suffer from the same problem? Are you proposing something to split the difference in size between a Camaro and BRZ? How big are you proposing this car to be, that IMO would put it at around the size of a Malibu and no way that car comes out for less than 20K

You say the BRZ is to small to be useable, yet according the manufacturer listed dimensions, the 2015 Camaro and BRZ both have 29.9 inches of rear seat leg room. The Camaro has 35.5 for rear head room, BRZ has 35 and the BRZ has more rear shoulder room. Interior wise, the BRZ pretty damn close to the size of the Camaro, despite being a much smaller over all car. the camaro wins in trunk volume tho.

Originally Posted by Number 3

Lol I think he was crediting you with my post that a Sonic RS was $21,000 while everyone is clamoring for something much "better" for under $20,000.

Love the attitude you profess. And I have no doubt GM could do a really fun car for $24,000 or $25,000. But my point has been simply that such a car would not sell nearly well enough to be profitable or survive.

And if you try for sub $20,000 with decent performance, well that car would be so cheaped out it wouldn't sell either.

If GM had a 30% market share maybe. But at 15 or 16% they don't have the luxury of piling hundreds of millions into a low profit, low volume car.

Yep I mean you sir, not Doc haha.

[Doc]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Yep in my quick post meant to say Number 3 not you hahah.

Yes they are not american pony cars, however they are EXACTLY what you are trying to say GM should introduce. A 2+2 coupe, smaller than the camaro, that looks sporty. IIRC almost all of the reviews of those cars, complained that they were not sporty enough!

This new pony car you are proposing, it needs to be smaller than the camaro correct? Because IMO if it is the same size it would defeat the purppose. The BRZ and FR-S are smaller than the Camaro. Yet you say those cars are too small and impractical???? How would a smaller American coupe not suffer from the same problem? Are you proposing something to split the difference in size between a Camaro and BRZ? How big are you proposing this car to be, that IMO would put it at around the size of a Malibu and no way that car comes out for less than 20K

You say the BRZ is to small to be useable, yet according the manufacturer listed dimensions, the 2015 Camaro and BRZ both have 29.9 inches of rear seat leg room. The Camaro has 35.5 for rear head room, BRZ has 35 and the BRZ has more rear shoulder room. Interior wise, the BRZ pretty damn close to the size of the Camaro, despite being a much smaller over all car. the camaro wins in trunk volume tho.



Yep I mean you sir, not Doc haha.

Geez lol do you work for Subaru or Scion?? No they aren't exactly what I'm talking about. I've said it repeatedly. Here's how they look:



They both look Japanese and to me, have paint-by-the-numbers styling; kind of straddling the line between looking Mazda-ish and/or Nissan-ish. The looks are okay but they're not going to stop me dead in my tracks.

Now let's look at the ranking according to U.S. News and World Report:



They're considered an "affordable SPORTS car" and they even show them out-ranking a Camaro, yet Mustang and Camaro completely trounce both of those cars sales-wise. So what's the difference that they fare so poorly in sales compared to the American high-performance sports GT Mustang and Camaro?

Number one...they are in the performance category which targets a particular crowd. For the performance crowd, too much is never enough. Which is why the Hellcat production team had to double their production capacity. Which is why Mustang and Camaro soundly outsell BRZ and FR-S. The performance crowd wants performance...period, and they will find the money to get what they want; even if the manufacturer doesn't already provide it; they'll find ways to mod their cars.

Number two... price. All this performance fun starts at around $25k and goes up from there to whatever your budget can handle. With tax, license and insurance, any of these entry model performance cars are going to have a monthly payment of at least $500 a month I would expect, and that's just simply out of range for new, entry-level buyers. Especially a new family with 1 or 2 children.

Number three...these are touted, reviewed and ranked as sports cars which is again, a performance category. That also dramatically affects the insurance rates; especially for young drivers. That alone can price them right out of sight.

So as for what I'm talking about...okay boys and girls...repeat after me... "ORIGINAL PONY CAR". That's right! Size, philosophy and function...American design and style inspired by the...gimme an O! gimme an R! gimme an I! gimme a G! gimme another I! gimme an N! gimme an A! gimme an L! Now what does that spell? ORIGINAL!!! yes, original pony car!

Take the size of the 1967 Camaro which has more than usable rear seating. It's slightly smaller than the current Camaro but bigger than a small Japanese car. This is an American pony car; not designed for Japan's (or Europe's for that matter) tight streets and crowded cities. It is NOT a performance/sports car; DO NOT, repeat DO NOT put it in that category or it will probably fail due to it having to start at $25K which also puts it solidly in competition with the Camaro which would be a disaster and an utterly stupid thing for GM to do.

The original pony cars were about looks and style; period. Once auto makers realized what a hit they were, they rapidly started adding power and performance but that's another story. For this particular story, start with the basics. This car is NOT aimed at performance auto magazines; it's NOT aimed at the performance car market; it's NOT A SPORTS CAR so the insurance won't be astronomical. It's yer basic bitchin' lookin American pony car. Fun for the whole family. Reasonably priced, affordable and makes the perfect fun second or third car for those who want to look sporty but aren't performance drivers. It's for the 80% which is a substantial market. You don't see or read about them in magazines. If they even belong to a car forum they probably don't post much if at all. They aren't in the spotlight which makes them fairly silent and invisible but they are the majority of buyers. That's the market GM needs to find the pulse of, and that's the market this car should be aimed at.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by Doc

This is not a diss on the Camaro; it is what it is and it offers tremendous value for the price, but I'm thinking GM needs to go back to its roots and come out with a new model performance car. A "younger brother" to the Camaro that starts at around $18,950 with a 4 cyl engine and maxed out with a V6 would be about $23k + tax. It should be sporty but not a track car like the Camaro is.

Its target market would be those who like to look like high performance; they wear the t-shirts, jackets and caps, but are not and will never be high performance drivers. They just want the styling and looks. This is also the perfect entry-level buyer who later on may want to upgrade which brings them into the Camaro realm. But for a lot of customers they just want to look sporty and would use this car to have fun around town, daily driver, take trips, etc. This would be a perfect first new car for high school students or a second/third car for families.

The foreign car companies already hit this target market, but with the Camaro now priced out of reach of this market I think it would be good for GM to use their formidable prowess to develop a competing car that could be a good way for new buyers to enter into becoming Chevrolet performance customers.

I'm thinking they could revive the Corvair name or come up with an alternate that sounds sporty. Take a transverse front wheel drive 4 or 6 and move that to the rear wheels. Give it great styling and aerodynamics in the front. A 4 seater without a lot of bells and whistles; a reasonably basic sporty car with plenty of room for customization later on by the customer if they choose to do so. Make it fun, make it affordable, make it sporty and stylish like a younger brother of the Camaro.

What do you guys think? Yes? No? Maybe?

Your first post you said you wanted it to be a entry level performance car, your words not mine. Now you don't want it lumped against performance cars. You said sporty car, but don't want to compare it to what it would get compared to, other sporty cars. Yes you also said for those who want to look like they want performance, but your first post described it as a basic performance car. Pretty much any RWD car is either sporty or luxury.

Yes the BRZ and FR-S have very heavy foreign styling, but they are essentially what you have been cooking up in your head. A smaller 2+2 coupe with 4cyl engine that is RWD, (yes granted you want the bold American style) These cars start at 25K

You also said that the BRZ and FR-S are to small to be useable cars, I provided you with the interior dimensions which showed they are basically identical to a 5th gen Camaro. How would the new pony car not suffer the same problem? When you described it as a younger brother, I am assuming you mean it would be smaller than the camaro so that it would be perfect for new drivers or second or third car. So explain to me how your new pony car would not suffer the same problem you listed for the BRZ even though its interior dimensions are very similar to the Camaro?

This car has to be smaller than the Camaro correct? so if you split the difference between the wheelbase BRZ that you say is to small and the Camaro that would give you something about the size of a Cruze.

A Cruze 1LS starts at almost 18K with the manual and 19K with the automatic. 18K gets you 138HP and 125 LB/FT. I just don't see how they could cram more style into a coupe(bc coupes always cost more) into a new RWD platform without quickly crossing into Camaro territory

Great discussion Doc, really helped move along the slow day at the office today.

[Doc]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Your first post you said you wanted it to be a entry level performance car, your words not mine. Now you don't want it lumped against performance cars. You said sporty car, but don't want to compare it to what it would get compared to, other sporty cars. Yes you also said for those who want to look like they want performance, but your first post described it as a basic performance car. Pretty much any RWD car is either sporty or luxury.

Yes the BRZ and FR-S have very heavy foreign styling, but they are essentially what you have been cooking up in your head. A smaller 2+2 coupe with 4cyl engine that is RWD, (yes granted you want the bold American style) These cars start at 25K

You also said that the BRZ and FR-S are to small to be useable cars, I provided you with the interior dimensions which showed they are basically identical to a 5th gen Camaro. How would the new pony car not suffer the same problem? When you described it as a younger brother, I am assuming you mean it would be smaller than the camaro so that it would be perfect for new drivers or second or third car. So explain to me how your new pony car would not suffer the same problem you listed for the BRZ even though its interior dimensions are very similar to the Camaro?

This car has to be smaller than the Camaro correct? so if you split the difference between the wheelbase BRZ that you say is to small and the Camaro that would give you something about the size of a Cruze.

A Cruze 1LS starts at almost 18K with the manual and 19K with the automatic. 18K gets you 138HP and 125 LB/FT. I just don't see how they could cram more style into a coupe(bc coupes always cost more) into a new RWD platform without quickly crossing into Camaro territory

Great discussion Doc, really helped move along the slow day at the office today.

If by now you don't understand what I've been getting at, regardless of the lack of very specific info I started out with, then I don't know what else to say. And I'm not sure why you're so stuck on the BRZ and FR-S. I've said repeatedly that the looks are everything. Those cars don't have it. Did you look at the pic that shows the back seat of the BRZ? I don't see how an adult could even sit up straight back there; they'd have to lean forward or sit hunched up because there's no headroom back there. Adults can reasonably fit in the back seat of a 1967 Camaro, which is my target size.

The reason those two cars aren't selling better is one - looks, and two - cost for what you get. They are smack up against Mustangs and Camaros which is killing them. When I say "sporty" I mean it has to accelerate better than an econobox/sedan; that's it. For the 80% the only kind of 'performance' they care about, will feel or even use, is acceleration in a straight line. And that's mostly how it feels starting off the line at a traffic light, or making a lane change on the freeway; which is a perception thing that can be taken care of with gearing. That's all the "sporty" it needs to have, so it is performance in a sense but not like a performance oriented car.

The Cruze is probably where they'd pull most of the parts from, but it's the body and interior that are critical; they have to be hot looking. You're not cramming "more" into this, in fact you may be putting "less" as far as tech and goodies, but where you put the most effort is in how it looks; style and design. I think ultimately it would actually wind up being less costly to produce as a result so it would be reasonably profitable. But it's the long-term "bringing them into the family" aspect that has the most value I think.

Yeah I have the day off; it's been raining off-and-on so I've just been staying inside, drinking coffee and reading on the internet. It has been an enjoyable discussion thus far!

[shaffe]

I get what you are saying, I understand completely what you are saying about the styling. When you mentioned slightly smaller than the Camaro, the BRZ is the first thing that comes to mind as a smaller coupe that is a 2+2. For some reason tho, you keep ignoring the dimensions I posted which show the rear seat dimensions are almost identical to the fifth gen camaro. You have ignored that 3 times now.

So now with the last post you made, you want this car to only be slightly smaller than the camaro. That to me makes it an even worse argument. I don't think it would be different enough from the camaro to make a business point. If it's to close to the camaro in size, I can't see how it could come in cheap enough to be built. Which is why I keep going to the BRZ, they are small 2+2 coupes smaller than the Camaro and Mustang exterior wise, but interior wise, very similar in size. That is why I keep bringing them up.

[Posaune]

Originally Posted by laborsmith

Here is the story I heard about the creation of the Mustang. Lee Iacocca lined up Ford offerings next to Chevrolet's and noted Ford had nothing to compare to the Corvair in its sporty (bucket seats and 4 on the floor) version. From that, the Mustang was born. Have no idea if it is accurate but do know it has been often told.

Laborsmith

While I’ve never heard that version of the story, the Mustang was a response to the Corvair.

Originally Posted by Number 3

As a group, we seem to be switching back and forth between a FWD and RWD alternative.

I think that is because want we want to see is this a RWD but reality (especially in the short term) is that we are more likely to see something based off the FWD Sonic/Cruze.

Originally Posted by Number 3

… That to me isn't very sporty, as pointed out earlier, the 2.0T in the Verano is not considered sporty, even though it is intended to be so.

Let's avoid turning this into a "I want it and it should only cost $xx,xxx" discussion.

So take a Sonic RS at $21,000 and add a real engine. That car does not drop below $20,000. Put in the 1.6T at 200 hp. That would be riot to drive. Is that fun enough? I think so. But that car is $22,500.

The Buick also doesn’t reach the intended price point we are looking for in this sporty model.
As for the Sonic, can’t imagine the 1.6T has a build cost much higher than the 1.4T. That would leave extra costs stemming from chassis tuning and brake upgrades.

Originally Posted by Doc

Well geez...you must have been a barrel of laughs to work with lol. So what you're telling me is absolutely nothing can be done; GM is doomed and shouldn't even try. The Fiero (which I'd forgotten about) was a 2-seater which of course limits its potential market; 2-seaters are sports cars and everybody knows that so it's no wonder the insurance companies priced their policies accordingly. So what would you propose? Is there anything GM can do or should they not even think about it and just hope that some other manufacturer doesn't figure it out?

Talked with the Scion rep after spending some time with the FR-S at the autoshow. We talked about the back seat room (or lack thereof) and he had the same conclusion I did about the backseat, it is only there for insurance purposes. It is unusable unless all four passengers are 4’9” girls that weigh 90lbs soaking wet.

Originally Posted by Doc

Okay if the business case has to be made (which is perfectly understandable) what does it cost to do a one-off concept car? If a concept car could be shown (like the original 5th gen concept) and gets a great reaction, how do they use that to decide if there's a business case to produce it? What exactly do they look for?

We’ve had a concept that was extremely popular, it was the C130R. It wasn’t its’ looks that made it more popular than the Tru140S concept that debuted at the same time, it was the fact that it was a cheap, RWD sporty car. Personally, I really liked the design. It looked better in person than in the photos. GM seemed shocked at its’ popularity. If you remember, both concepts were painted (C130R went from Red to Grey, T140S went from white pearl to bright yellow) to help draw attention to the T140S. C130R was still more popular. While FWD would be easier to make a business case for, people wanted the RWD Code.
Finding the platform for a Code type vehicle is/was the biggest challenge. Alpha, while we are told is ‘premium, not expensive’ (GM executive chief engineer David Leone) it cannot hit the price point needed for a cheap entry level model. Maybe there will be hope as GM moves to their VSS-R (vehicle Strategy Set-RWD) in the future. If the idea for a Code type vehicle is baked in from the beginning, it may have a chance however, that still leave challenge number two, how to not compete with the Camaro across the showroom.
To not compete with big brother Camaro, this vehicle cannot be a coupe. I would suggest a shooting brake body style (two-door wagon). I would suggest this for a few reasons:
1) GM does not have a direct replacement for the out of production but popular HHR. The HHR garnered about 75k sales per year.
2) Styled correctly, it could be the Nomad type vehicle that has had great internal support since the Kappa Concept debuted at NAIAS 2004. Again, another RWD concept that was very popular but GM couldn’t get the platform to work.
3) Mark Reuss has stated a few times about wanting an affordable wagon in the U.S. (don’t remember the exact quotes)
4) This vehicle will need global appeal and sales volume. Wagons are much more accepted outside the U.S. and with a 4cyl engine range could meet strict requirements of Europe, ect.
Short term, add the 1.6T to the Sonic and bring it out a cheaply as possible. To do so, maybe don’t tie it to the RS package. Let it be available with cloth seats and basic interior/electronics.
Long term, develop RWD entry with VSS-R.

[Doc]

Originally Posted by Posaune

While I’ve never heard that version of the story, the Mustang was a response to the Corvair.

I think that is because want we want to see is this a RWD but reality (especially in the short term) is that we are more likely to see something based off the FWD Sonic/Cruze.


The Buick also doesn’t reach the intended price point we are looking for in this sporty model.
As for the Sonic, can’t imagine the 1.6T has a build cost much higher than the 1.4T. That would leave extra costs stemming from chassis tuning and brake upgrades.


Talked with the Scion rep after spending some time with the FR-S at the autoshow. We talked about the back seat room (or lack thereof) and he had the same conclusion I did about the backseat, it is only there for insurance purposes. It is unusable unless all four passengers are 4’9” girls that weigh 90lbs soaking wet.


We’ve had a concept that was extremely popular, it was the C130R. It wasn’t its’ looks that made it more popular than the Tru140S concept that debuted at the same time, it was the fact that it was a cheap, RWD sporty car. Personally, I really liked the design. It looked better in person than in the photos. GM seemed shocked at its’ popularity. If you remember, both concepts were painted (C130R went from Red to Grey, T140S went from white pearl to bright yellow) to help draw attention to the T140S. C130R was still more popular. While FWD would be easier to make a business case for, people wanted the RWD Code.
Finding the platform for a Code type vehicle is/was the biggest challenge. Alpha, while we are told is ‘premium, not expensive’ (GM executive chief engineer David Leone) it cannot hit the price point needed for a cheap entry level model. Maybe there will be hope as GM moves to their VSS-R (vehicle Strategy Set-RWD) in the future. If the idea for a Code type vehicle is baked in from the beginning, it may have a chance however, that still leave challenge number two, how to not compete with the Camaro across the showroom.
To not compete with big brother Camaro, this vehicle cannot be a coupe. I would suggest a shooting brake body style (two-door wagon). I would suggest this for a few reasons:
1) GM does not have a direct replacement for the out of production but popular HHR. The HHR garnered about 75k sales per year.
2) Styled correctly, it could be the Nomad type vehicle that has had great internal support since the Kappa Concept debuted at NAIAS 2004. Again, another RWD concept that was very popular but GM couldn’t get the platform to work.
3) Mark Reuss has stated a few times about wanting an affordable wagon in the U.S. (don’t remember the exact quotes)
4) This vehicle will need global appeal and sales volume. Wagons are much more accepted outside the U.S. and with a 4cyl engine range could meet strict requirements of Europe, ect.
Short term, add the 1.6T to the Sonic and bring it out a cheaply as possible. To do so, maybe don’t tie it to the RS package. Let it be available with cloth seats and basic interior/electronics.
Long term, develop RWD entry with VSS-R.

Interesting ideas...and welcome to the conversation! I like the idea that a RWD platform could be shared between a coupe (I still want a coupe) and a wagon/Nomad/HHR replacement. I honestly don't see an affordable pony car coupe hurting the Camaro; if anything it provides the starting point for someone who will later move up to the performance that the Camaro has, that this entry-level pony car won't.

A wagon (for lack of a better term) that's based on the same platform would also be similar in price point and mission; clean, minimum of frills, great looks and style, but affordable. Again I'd do everything in my power to get the price point under $20k; there's just something psychologically magical about seeing a 19 instead of a 20. Even if it's only $50 less at $19,950 plus tax that's going to have a lot of appeal to new buyers and people looking for an affordable 2nd or 3rd vehicle.

I like that idea so much I think I'll start working on sketching up some ideas for the conversation. A wagon...Nomadish...not an SUV but not a regular passenger sedan either. VERY interesting idea! That and the coup could pretty much share almost everything except the body and interior. Although some things from the interior could be shared like seats, steering wheel, etc. I like it! Great post!!

[shaffe]

I just can't see it being built for under 20 Doc, I keep looking at the basic chevy models and to get them decently equipped you are right about 18-20.

The thing I think you are missing out on is the no frills interior. My brother in law is in his 20s. His age group - which is who you are targeting and younger are obsessed with technology. Wearables, smart phones, tablets, they can't get enough tech and electronic gizmos. I think this type of car would need to have some of that "flashy tech" in it and that would drive the price up.

[Posaune]

Originally Posted by shaffe

I just can't see it being built for under 20 Doc, I keep looking at the basic chevy models and to get them decently equipped you are right about 18-20.

The thing I think you are missing out on is the no frills interior. My brother in law is in his 20s. His age group - which is who you are targeting and younger are obsessed with technology. Wearables, smart phones, tablets, they can't get enough tech and electronic gizmos. I think this type of car would need to have some of that "flashy tech" in it and that would drive the price up.

What flashy tech do you mean? Bluetooth, touchscreen? Use the Mylink radio from the <$15k Spark which has:

Originally Posted by Chevy.com

Chevrolet MyLink radio, AM/FM stereo with seek-and-scan and digital clock includes Bluetooth streaming audio for music and select phones; voice recognition for compatible phone; Pandora, TuneIn radio, Stitcher and Siri Eyes Free voice recognition smartphone compatible; all functions controlled through 7" diagonal color touch-screen (Includes (UW6) 6-speaker system.) (STD)

4G LTE connectivity seems to be added to every Chevy or soon will be.

Steering wheel mounted audio and phone interface controls are standard on the 2015 Sonic.

You raid the parts bin for this, using as many of the tech pieces developed for the other Chevys on the lot. The tech part should be the easy part of the equation.

[Doc]

Originally Posted by shaffe

I just can't see it being built for under 20 Doc, I keep looking at the basic chevy models and to get them decently equipped you are right about 18-20.

The thing I think you are missing out on is the no frills interior. My brother in law is in his 20s. His age group - which is who you are targeting and younger are obsessed with technology. Wearables, smart phones, tablets, they can't get enough tech and electronic gizmos. I think this type of car would need to have some of that "flashy tech" in it and that would drive the price up.

It doesn't need much, just the basic things which as Posaune points out is easily pulled from the parts bin. This isn't a luxury car, it's a basic pony car with the kind of looks young people would much rather have than something their parents would drive with all the "luxuries".

Originally Posted by Posaune

What flashy tech do you mean? Bluetooth, touchscreen? Use the Mylink radio from the <$15k Spark which has:


4G LTE connectivity seems to be added to every Chevy or soon will be.

Steering wheel mounted audio and phone interface controls are standard on the 2015 Sonic.

You raid the parts bin for this, using as many of the tech pieces developed for the other Chevys on the lot. The tech part should be the easy part of the equation.

Yes I agree. The tough part is the design and style. The interior in particular has to look great but that doesn't automatically mean lots of expensive tech. If you're sitting in the drivers seat you're supposed to be driving, not playing around with tech goodies. Once you choose your settings, link your phone, pick your music... that should be it. At that point what you want to see is the information you need to see as you're driving; speed, fuel level, etc. That's about it; it's a basic pony car, not a Camaro or Stingray which is reflected in the price.

As long as it looks great to walk up to, and looks great inside; buyers will "get it". Oh and I'd make accessory options minimal without expensive "bundles" that make you buy a bunch of features you don't want just to get the one thing you do want. Make fog lights a separate item, or something that can easily and inexpensively be added at the dealer (or by the owner; plug and play). If there is a tech/convenience package, make the moon roof separate.

This can be done; just needs the will to do it. They have everything they need, just need to come up with the design. Give it some edge; none of the big rounded soft edges, like you're driving a vinyl padded couch. Even though this is an entry-level model, it's a statement too as much as anything else. I would love to see Chevrolet do this first instead of Ford.

[IOMike]

I just don't think there is room under the Camaro for a FR-s style car. Plus, why? They're sales flops.

I could see a Cruze SS sedan / hatch with the 2.0T. That would compete with the Focus ST.