[kcpoloman]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

Because in order to grow the market share they need to compete and fight to change the image of GM.

Not sure about you but the majority of cars I see on the road are domestic, either Ford or GM. Seem to be doing alright.

[Bongos2U]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

Yes. There is still a very bad brand image issue for Chevy...less-so for Ford. Even though that BMW was probably marginally equipped, and featured a comparably anemic engine compared to the Camaros in the room....it was a "BMW"...which so many people apparently attribute as "better".

I still say the salesman was shoddy, or biased...or both. He could have at least told the guy, "Yes, it's expensive, come - sit inside and I'll show you why. Then we can look at the BMW."

You would think that people would figure out BMW and Mercedes vehicles are basically money pits. The cost of ownership is insane. Even their entry level cars. Check out this video featuring Scotty Kilmer (yes, his voice is kind of annoying).



But perception is reality. Why are people still so enamored with these cars?

[90503]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

Because in order to grow the market share they need to compete and fight to change the image of GM.

Isn't that Cadillac's job?....They went up-market, up-scale, up-price...

How's that been working out for GM? The mistake to compete would be to morph the Camaro into another copy-cat, generic image car. There are already plenty of those to be had. It's not a BMW or a Cadillac.

Get all the Camaro models and versions available and it's image and market share will take care of itself.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

Sounds like a not-so-great salesman...should have at least mentioned how loaded that car was (must have been)....

A 2LT convertible would have compared nicely to that 228i convertible and might have won the sales if it were available. I do not believe that father was seriously considered a 2SS for his daughter.

I keep see the same type of comparisons being made. Highly loaded Chevys compared to low level, upscale models. The dollars overlap but the content and performance are far apart.

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

Because in order to grow the market share they need to compete and fight to change the image of GM.

Exactly. GM needs to reestablish the brand. Cadillac and Buick were once more asperational than BMW, Audi or Mercedes. What's the other option? Build low cost crap again.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by hotlapZL1

A 2LT convertible would have compared nicely to that 228i convertible and might have won the sales if it were available. I do not believe that father was seriously considered a 2SS for his daughter.

I keep see the same type of comparisons being made. Highly loaded Chevys compared to low level, upscale models. The dollars overlap but the content and performance are far apart.


Exactly. GM needs to reestablish the brand. Cadillac and Buick were once more asperational than BMW, Audi or Mercedes. The other choice is to build low cost crap again.

Again you've fallen into the trap of a loyalist. It doesn't matter that the equipment on the cars is different. And by the way if you go look at what you get in a base MB CLA you will not find it BASE at all. Yes, you'll pay a bunch for many of the safety features (SBZA, FCA, etc.) as well as NAV but I'll tell you when we bought our first Audi (Q5) it was simply a matter that the Q5 was only a few thousand more than a loaded Equinox. Gave up NAV and that was it.

The issue is you can have a base MB CLA or a loaded Fusion. Some people will pick the Fusion. Many would rather have the 3 pointed star, outstanding dealer service, and a 4 year warranty.

That's the battle. To hold a 2016 Malibu up to a MB for the same price and try to suggest you have all the bells and whistles will lose too many comparisons.

So if GM has to play that game, and they do, then they need better cars and they need better Chevrolets.

I've already made my point a hundred time on how Buick alone keeps GM from making better Chevrolets. Traxx to Encore, Verano to Cruze, Malibu to Regal and Impala to Lacrosse. You can't get the best equipment on the Chevrolets simply because there would be no need for Buick.

[90503]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Again you've fallen into the trap of a loyalist. It doesn't matter that the equipment on the cars is different. And by the way if you go look at what you get in a base MB CLA you will not find it BASE at all. Yes, you'll pay a bunch for many of the safety features (SBZA, FCA, etc.) as well as NAV but I'll tell you when we bought our first Audi (Q5) it was simply a matter that the Q5 was only a few thousand more than a loaded Equinox. Gave up NAV and that was it.

The issue is you can have a base MB CLA or a loaded Fusion. Some people will pick the Fusion. Many would rather have the 3 pointed star, outstanding dealer service, and a 4 year warranty.

That's the battle. To hold a 2016 Malibu up to a MB for the same price and try to suggest you have all the bells and whistles will lose too many comparisons.

So if GM has to play that game, and they do, then they need better cars and they need better Chevrolets.

I've already made my point a hundred time on how Buick alone keeps GM from making better Chevrolets. Traxx to Encore, Verano to Cruze, Malibu to Regal and Impala to Lacrosse. You can't get the best equipment on the Chevrolets simply because there would be no need for Buick.

Dear Mr. Number3...

I'm curious as to what you believe the "answer" is to all the issues you so eloquently bring up....(I won't list them all here), but what, if anything, can the current Camaro owner or potential customer realistically do to effect any changes that you believe should happen?

...Or are all your arguments only for the ears of those with the power at GM to do something differently in the future? I think perhaps you unfairly label many as "loyalists" when perhaps a "realist" would be more appropriate.

It seems you tend to accuse any customers as being willing or unwittingly accomplices in some inevitable demise of the Camaro line. Everyone hopes for success and quality improvements for Chevy, GM, and Camaro. But what exactly would you like to see everyone do for this to happen?

Thank you.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by kcpoloman

Not sure about you but the majority of cars I see on the road are domestic, either Ford or GM. Seem to be doing alright.

That image changes dramatically region-to-region. It's similar to your observations around me, as well. But travel to some of the snootier, coastal cities - and the majority of the cars on the road are Japanese and European.

"Perception is reality", as they say.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Again you've fallen into the trap of a loyalist. It doesn't matter that the equipment on the cars is different. And by the way if you go look at what you get in a base MB CLA you will not find it BASE at all. Yes, you'll pay a bunch for many of the safety features (SBZA, FCA, etc.) as well as NAV but I'll tell you when we bought our first Audi (Q5) it was simply a matter that the Q5 was only a few thousand more than a loaded Equinox. Gave up NAV and that was it.

The issue is you can have a base MB CLA or a loaded Fusion. Some people will pick the Fusion. Many would rather have the 3 pointed star,y outstanding dealer service, and a 4 year warranty.

That's the battle. To hold a 2016 Malibu up to a MB for the same price and try to suggest you have all the bells and whistles will lose too many comparisons.

So if GM has to play that game, and they do, then they need better cars and they need better Chevrolets.

I've already made my point a hundred time on how Buick alone keeps GM from making better Chevrolets. Traxx to Encore, Verano to Cruze, Malibu to Regal and Impala to Lacrosse. You can't get the best equipment on the Chevrolets simply because there would be no need for Buick.

I like Chevy V8 cars but am not a loyalist. GM lost me as a loyal customer in the late 90s and all of my none performance car purchases have been other since. The new GM however has me interested again.

I searched local inventory of the MB CLA and Fusion. I found one base CLA at $36,400 and others over $40k. Only one Fusion near the base CLA was a Titanium trim level. Is that a good comparison when 90% of Fusions are under $23k?

When I came back after a year in Germany (2008) I looked at the A3 wagon for my wife but for the same money a Toyota Venza or Honda Crosstour offered much more AND because I own my cars ~8 years would never consider a German brand due to maintenance cost.

The 2SS is an expensive car and I'm happy to be in a position to afford one. Not everyone should or needs to buy a car at that level. If the cost overlaps with a 3 series then the buyer needs to decide what they want from a car because they offer very different experiences.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by 90503

Dear Mr. Number3...

I'm curious as to what you believe the "answer" is to all the issues you so eloquently bring up....(I won't list them all here), but what, if anything, can the current Camaro owner or potential customer realistically do to effect any changes that you believe should happen?

...Or are all your arguments only for the ears of those with the power at GM to do something differently in the future? I think perhaps you unfairly label many as "loyalists" when perhaps a "realist" would be more appropriate.

It seems you tend to accuse any customers as being willing or unwittingly accomplices in some inevitable demise of the Camaro line. Everyone hopes for success and quality improvements for Chevy, GM, and Camaro. But what exactly would you like to see everyone do for this to happen?

Thank you.

Huge long answer required if you want to go beyond Camaro. Maybe not enough space on all the servers that support Camaro5 and 6. LOL.

The question you have asked was discussed over several thousand coffees between myself and my trusted friends when I worked there.

As for customers being unwilling accomplices? No, that isn't really possible any longer. Used to be you bought whatever was introduced. Now there are just too many good choices in almost every segment that if you don't satisfy a customer with your product, they will simply go elsewhere. If you aren't great, you'll quickly be relegated to niche status.

But on a bigger level, a lot of GM's problem is deeply rooted within it's own history and some of it is simply how GM still operates to this very day.

Historically, GM was so big at one point that the government actually tried to break it up. They were that dominant that the U.S. Government considered them a monopoly. What you won't ever see written, oddly enough but it is my observation, is that when the government tried to break them up from having such great products, GM basically went the mode of just making money. The early 70s was wrought with quality problems (think Vega and Chevette among many others), but it was those wonderful 80s that was the beginning of the lonnnnggggggg slowwwwwww decline. J-cars, including a Cadillac version(Cavalier, Skyhawk, Firenza, J2000, Cimaron.....) . A-cars for everyone but Cadillac (6000, Celbrity). The Riviera and Toronado were downsized so badly you couldn't tell if it was an N-car (Grand Am, Alero). GM helped coin the term "cookie cutter cars". And much of this was done in a declining market where Americans were (justifiably) buying Japanese cars more and more. Not they those were of any real quality, but they were much better than what GM and Ford could muster. All the way to the bankruptcy GM tried to the be the mama bird feeding multiple brands with products. And in all that mess was Saturn that also got product development and product $$$$. It was a death spiral of inferior product after inferior product. GM was it's greatest when it competed with itself. GM had multiple small block and multiple big block V8s...........at the same time. Unique engines so much so that when GM actually first tried to put corporate engines in cars...........THEY GOT SUED! Look up the Chevy-mobile fiasco. I bought an Oldsmobile damn it, I want an Oldsmobile engine.

When I worked for Nissan in the early 90s, we had two types of benchmarking activities. One was for product features and performance and the other was for cost reduction. GM products were NEVER in the product focused activities, only the cost reduction ones because of how cheap the GM cars were then.

Now to the last 10 years or so, look at the products where GM did still dominate. Where GM currently has the biggest presence in the market and that is Full Size Pickups and SUVs. Yes, Ford F150 is still number 1, but all in with Silverado, Sierra, Tahoe, Yukon, Suburban and oh yeah, Escalade, GM has a juggernaut of vehicles that almost all sell for more than $40,000. I bet if you looked at the total numbers, Chevrolet sells more $50,000 plus vehicles than BMW, MB or Audi in the US. If not it's awful close. This success, from my point of view and what I saw and experienced, was due to the fundamental knowledge of who your customer was and who your competition is.............and the important part was knowing your customer. Yes, that was helped a lot by only having to worry about Ford, Dodge, Toyota and Nissan, a small bunch of competitors to be sure compared to compact, small and mid-size cars where you add Mazda, VW, Hyundai/Kia, among others that offer competitive if not outstanding cars.

If you study why GM went bankrupt, it was simply that when the price of gas spiked in the late 2000's GM lost so many sales of profitable truck sales that they could no longer pay their bills. HUGE bills of legacy costs of pensions and retirement benefits for over 1,000,000 people.

So as I've said many time on my career, when I started GM had mid 40% market share. When I left 4 1/2 years ago it was 16%. I still have my lapel pin with the number 29 on it. GM had drawn the line at 29% market share and would not go below it.................until the very next year.

Now for today, GM still has 4 brands to feed. I say 4 but as of today it still has a unique brand in China (forget the name), Opel, Vauxhall, and Holden. We see a Holden product here (SS) but there are a lot of Opel/Vauxhall products we either don't see or that get badged Buicks for the U.S. and China. Verano is one of those, Regal another. And of course there is a Regal Wagon and Hatchback that don't even come here that many claim they would love to have. But in the US, 4 is more than anyone else. Ford has Ford and Lincoln. Toyota, with the demise of Scion, now has Toyota and Lexus. Honda has Honda and Acura. So how do you make your very best cars when you need to have space for 4 brands.

So a shout out to the fallen brothers in the past 10 years: Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Saturn and Hummer.

As I outlined before, putting the 2.0t in the Cruze fights against the Verano that does get the 2.0t as it's option. The Traxx? You can't get leather seats. You need to move up the Buick Encore if you want those. Same thing with the engine. The Encore now gets a larger turbo engine than the Traxx. Want the good chassis in the Impala? Nope, you have to move up to the Lacrosse where it's optional or the XTS where it's standard. Want AWD in a Malibu? Nope have to get the Buick Regal for that. Don't mind that the Fusion does have AWD. On and on and on. GM still has the problem of competing with itself, but no longer in the good way it was in the 50s and 60s. GMC? Yes, it gives the Buick dealer a truck to sell, but it is, with the exception of Denali, the same truck you can get at the Chevy dealer. And now not only do you have the Chevy dealer having to compete with an offer from Ford or Dodge, he or she has to compete with the GMC dealer up the road selling the same product. But Buick needs to exist if nothing more than to have China Buicks. And we will get the first Chinese made Buick imported soon along with the CT6 hybrid.

And by the way the above is a very shortened version. Very.

So how do you fix this? Much harder to answer that than what is wrong. First, GM is a very poor global company. Yes, China sales are robust and now exceed even the U.S. but for the most part, it's tough to sell a Chevy anywhere but the U.S. And if you took truck sales of the total, Chevrolet cars is a small player in the Global Market. Why? Tough question, but in Europe, it frankly has been a car good enough to compete with VW or even Opel. But Europe is a tough nut to crack. Toyota and Lexus for example don't do particularly well there either.

But the answer is to try and follow the truck model. GM still owns this segment and it does so with vehicles that define the market or at the very least are hugely competitive across the entire competitive set.

When is the last time GM had Chevrolet mid-size car that defined the segment? A small car? A full size car? I can't recall one. Yes, there were COTY awards, but sales never followed.

As Lutz used to always say, the answer is in great products. But GM is somewhat stuck here with Buick as the tweener. What happens when Cadillac needs a smaller SUV than the new XT5? BMW has the X1, Audi has the Q3 and threatening with a Q1. Lexus has the new NX. All of these are starting in the mid $30,000 range. About what a well appointed Equinox and Terrain go for. And with the new Buick Envision coming next year. It will only get worse for GM to try and have unique products that don't just compete, but set the bar. Cadillac has to go down market to maintain sales and profitability with the other luxury brands. Chevy has to be able to be better still and not limited by the space Buick needs.

I mean seriously, if you could get AWD and the hiper strut/linked h-arm suspension in and Impala would there be any need for a Lacrosse and development and tooling money that car requires? I don't think so. And that money could go to a broader Cadillac lineup. Have you ever compared Cadillacs line up of cars and SUVs to MB? Audi? BMW? Far fewer choices.

Now in the next year, we'll have a good idea of where Chevrolet stands. Within a years time, Chevrolet will have introduced a new Camaro, Volt, Cruze, Malibu and Spark. 5 brand new cars on the showroom floor. I don't know of any other brand that will have that. Not refreshes, but ALL NEW models.

And for the Camaro? All I wanted was a truly great coupe that exceeded every possible comparator against any comer. Yes, we got a truly outstanding car, but take the SS off the table. V6 only. GM could have made the car in ways that nothing competed with it. Price honestly isn't bad for a V6. But for usability, the car gave up many things for the sake of styling. They could have even added AWD, a huge advantage over the Mustang, but chose not too even though Alpha enables it. And that IMO, makes it less appealing to a broader audience than it could have been. GM should have tried to make the best coupe ever, not the best Camaro ever. A car that would have even fewer tradeoffs than the Gen5. A car that at $50,000 stood up against anything. But today, the car wins BIG TIME if you bring the SS back in and let performance be the decision maker. I'm sure the SS will in the upcoming M4 comparison handle itself quite well. I don't think it wins, but it will get big points for what it does for $30,000 LESS.

So to my point, GM could stand a Camaro with a smaller trunk, less rear seat room and better visibility IF they had another choice. But that other choice is counter to everything I've been saying. GM no longer has the sales volumes to have multiple coupes. Everyone wants a GN or GNX from Buick. But all that would do is cannibalize Camaro sales. GM just can't afford that business model anymore.

But to be clear, the Gen6 Camaro is a really great Camaro. I hope they sell a $hit ton of them. But for me it is a screaming example of the old GM, not a forward thinking visionary company that defines automobiles. As I said, GM only does that in trucks. It seems to me that GM is now simply accepting that after the bankruptcy, being profitable on lower volumes is just fine. Being the world leader that defines the technology of personal transportation just doesn't seem to be there anymore. And as 3rd generation GM guy (my grandfather worked in Flint during the sit down strike that lead the UAW) that is what hurts the most. And that is why I'm pickier than most on GM's products. I know the people that are there and I know what they are capable of doing. And being the best in the world is still well within their grasp. And THAT is what I hope for. THAT is what I want to see.

I am probably one of the biggest GM fans on this website. Not just because of the fact I have a pension riding on it, but because it's a huge part of who I am, who my friends are, where I grew up, even where I went to school (GMI with an Automotive Engineering Cognate, btw). And I already posted years ago what Camaro means to me and why even though I don't own one, it remains important to me and my passion for cars. I want the same things for the company that I did when I was there, to regain dominance and define the market in every segment they compete in.

[Techn9cian805]

Havent seen a camaro commercial so far this super bowl. What is up with chevy's marketing?

[Stex]

LOL, all this bs because some chick bought a bummer over a 2SS? bummer rag is a chick car. no cross shopping between a 2SS and a bummer 2 rag...

[Techn9cian805]

Originally Posted by Stex

LOL, all this bs because some chick bought a bummer over a 2SS? bummer rag is a chick car. no cross shopping between a 2SS and a bummer 2 rag...

Well, in all fairness, the majority of 5th gen owners were women, so...





Jk. But what difference does it make that she's a chick? Do remember that chevy is trying to squeeze into the BMW target market, so it is a bit of a concern that their effort may fail, if this isolated event is telling of future sales.

[Stex]

Originally Posted by Techn9cian805

Well, in all fairness, the majority of 5th gen owners were women, so...





Jk. But what difference does it make that she's a chick? Do remember that chevy is trying to squeeze into the BMW target market, so it is a bit of a concern that their effort may fail, if this isolated event is telling of future sales.

wt, did I say that. I said a chick does not cross shop a 2SS and a bummer rag 2...they brought up the chick story not me...name a bummer for 50 big ones that outperforms a 1 or 2 SS. If anything hurts the c-6 it will be the chop top view not the price. The engine and the handling is beyond most 70-grand cars.

[Techn9cian805]

So i just saw a mustang commercial, yet again no camaro. I cant help but call out chevy on a missed opportunity to get some exposure.