By on September 18, 2008

The Wall Street Journal reports that General Motors has canceled plans to build the seven-seat Orlando stateside, or bring a foreign-built version to The Land of the Free. “The canceled Chevrolet vehicle, code-named the ‘Delta MPV7,’ was originally intended to be built in Hamtramck, Mich., beginning next year, according to the auto maker’s recent agreements with the United Auto Workers union. The MPV, or multi-purpose vehicle, would have been based on GM’s compact-car architecture, but capable of seating seven people.” The program termination leaves the U.S. factory SOL, hoping to score Volt production (via federal low-interest loans, of course). The United Auto Workers (UAW) can’t be too pleased about recent developments, having acquiesced to GM’s “two-tier” wage system, increased health insurance co-pays, etc. in their last contract. “In recent months, the auto maker has suspended plans for several new models that GM told the UAW last September it would eventually build in North America. These suspended model programs include a new generation full-size trucks and sport-utility vehicles; large, rear-wheel drive luxury cars; and a redesigned flagship sedan, known as the Aura, for the Saturn division.” To be fair, that is one ugly-looking thing. And did GM really need another model? More interestingly, was the Orlando a head fake from the beginning?

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

20 Comments on “GM Cancels U.S. Production for Orlando Crossover...”


  • avatar
    KixStart

    Is the Orlando cancelled to make way for the Pontiac, Saab, Cadillac and Hummer Lambdas?

  • avatar
    Edward Niedermeyer

    Bad, bad move. See the Kia Rondo/Mazda5 discussion hread for more.

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    This car would have savaged the sales of GM’s more profitable seven-plus seaters, giving GM even less margin per unit.

    Of course, it might have also rewarded them with more units in total, and larger net margin, especially since Kia and Mazda don’t exactly have the marketing or dealer depth that Chevy does. But at GM it’s all about profit per unit, and that’s why their economy cars have, do, and will in all likelyhood continue to be 80% efforts.

    They’ll have to kick out this cost-accountancy fixation if they ever hope to be a mass-market force again.

  • avatar
    Ingvar

    Wasn’t he Orlando supposed to be the one-box version of the Cruze-platform? If so, it could have been the Volt Station Wagon, a green alternative that actually makes sense.

  • avatar
    crackers

    Could this not replace the Torrent/Equinox?

  • avatar
    Redbarchetta

    Wow another production cut, and a car that would have actually made sales sense at this time. I wonder if the money is getting so thin they can’t afford to make these no matter how they may have helped.

    psarhjinian I don’t think this thing would have hurt the Lambdas, and would have helped them in a market they generally don’t do well in now. The other 7 passengers are just way to big and thirsty for a lot of buyers, including myself, on top of costing way too much. Instead of having a smaller option to choose from(not that I would ever buy something from them again) those potential customers just bail to someone else, like Mazda. No sale of a Lambda, no sale of any GM.

  • avatar
    Seth L

    So where’s it going to built then? Mexico?

  • avatar
    NickR

    Dang, I was waiting to see the ingenious way they incorporated shuffleboard into the design.

  • avatar
    Richard Chen

    So much for the USofA being a low-cost car manufacturing base to export to the Euro zone.

  • avatar
    mel23

    What the hell is wrong with these fools? It’s my understanding that a presentation is made to the bystanders to get a go ahead for a car. So it’s reasonable to think the bystanders are also consulted/notified when a significant change happens. Significant like a cancellation or change of build site. So what must it be like to see Ricky and Bobby bopping in with their ever-upbeat demeanor talking yet another U-turn? And by the way, where the hell is the Camaro? Maddening.

    These guys need more than a bailout.

  • avatar
    Adub

    Like a 2×4 to the head?

    “2003 Camaro? We don’t need no sticking Camaro. It doesn’t sell enough! What we’ll do is rebadge a car from Australia and sell more of those instead…”

    The HHR was a copy of the Prowler, the new Camaro is a copy of the Mustang (including the retro interior). The Aztek was an original abomination. I’m seeing a pattern here…

  • avatar
    SupaMan

    A sign of things to come.

  • avatar
    ppellico

    I for one am happy.
    I don’t think yet another small van/people hauler is what they need.
    They have the SSR.
    They need to stop introducingnew models and fix quickly the ones they have.
    Why can’t they fix the Torrent/Equinox.
    Get rid of the Torrent and make the Equinox a really good small ECONOMICAL CUV.
    This thing should be getting 26 27 mpg.
    As of right now, it gets the same as the new Traverse (24).
    So why the hell buy it?
    If it did, it be a very popular purchase…

  • avatar
    CaliCarGuy

    this was a good move to me because 1. chevy has 2 many models. and 2. this would cause overlap wit the next gen equinox which seats 7 people. this would have ended up being jus another failed attempt. sure it might b smaller and get beter mpg, but really though y would u buy a small seater

  • avatar
    Banger

    Adub:

    “The HHR was a copy of the Prowler…”

    I think you meant to say the HHR was a copy blatant rip-off of the PT Cruiser. But I see your point. A little originality couldn’t hurt– and original, this ain’t. I don’t blame them for canceling it.

  • avatar
    John Horner

    Efficient small and mid-size mono-box vehicles are all over the roads in Europe. During a recent visit to Ireland I was amazed to see families pouring out of vehicles about one half the size of those we here in the US seem to think are required. They seemed quite friendly and happy as well, unlike most of the Escalade driving crowd I meet around here.

    But hey, at least Chevrolet dealers will have yet another Korean or Chinese product to sell under the “An American Revolution” banner.

  • avatar
    nudave

    I would think by now the UAW would understand that all of GM’s US production will eventually be cancelled.

    If GM actually survives, I suspect they will “make” cars just like Westinghouse “makes” televisions and Kodak “makes” cameras.

    And (although I may be wrong on this) I don’t believe the UAW has a presence in China, Korea, Malaysia, Indonesia, or India.

  • avatar
    Mark MacInnis

    So, it would appear that they dug into every office sofa in the RenCen, and couldn’t come up with enough nickels to pay for the tooling and development. That they are giving the ax to this, while giving the go-ahead for the abomination known as the G3, speaks volumes.

    A shame, as this is the one GM vehicle with true promise that I have seen all year.

    All the proceeds from soda-can deposits must be being poured into the Volt, which makes it now the “home run or bust” vehicle for the General. Perhaps they should rename any rebadged Pontiac version of the Volt as the “Alamo.”

    I am willing to bet my last piaster (Steely Dan reference alert) we’ll see C11 from GM before we see a delivered Camaro. Any takers?

  • avatar
    davey49

    nudave- there are fairly strong unions in Korea, don’t know about the rest. Shipping costs for Asian manufacture for cars trump the savings in labor.
    Mexico(cheap labor) and Canada (expensive labor but no medical costs) win for making cars for sale in North America.
    There’s a rumor they’re replacing this with a tiny car again (Beat?)

  • avatar
    morbo

    ppellico said: ”’and make the Equinox a really good small ECONOMICAL CUV…it be a very popular purchase……”

    Avis punished me with this thing (actually a Torrent) the last time I rented from them (I think they’re still mad at me for returning a top of the line Galant to them sans rear bumper). NOTHING will EVER make this thing desirable. I’ve driven enough of these CUV’s to know what they’re about. The things which make the CR-V & Escape desirable & the RAV4 and Outlander acceptable, are what the Torrenox fail at miserably. It got a horribly rough engine, mated to an archaic, gear-hunting transmission with horrible fuel economy. Acceleration (off-the-line or 40MPH+), usually the one saving grace of a rough engine and clueless transmission, is not present. It sways during lane changes, sways during braking, and sways in a swift wind. The interior gave me eye cancer from looking at it; seriously, I can’t be in the driver’s seat without some plasti-chrome somewhere blinding me. The fit and finish after 3000 miles at Avis was… revealing. I started turning up the sound system to mask the rattles, but the hissing from the tinny speakers got too annoying. I was actually too afraid to take it off-road; meanwhile I’ve taken an Escape (actually Mariner – damn Avis and their rebadge purchases) down the mountain on the big Island of Hawaii (and more importantly back up), found the Grand Cherokee is great at pulling out of frozen mud/snow/rain (except that the damn thing sucks fuel like a baby sucks a teat) and that the Chevy Impala drives surprising well in the sands of West Florida.

    Sorry for the rant. I don’t normally go off-topic, but the Torrenox s just SO BAD I felt it was necessary.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • J & J Sutherland, Canada
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India