Ten Cars GM Should Copy? Seriously?

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

The MSM knows GM’s broken. (Ya think?) They also know the Presidential Task Force on Autos (PTFOA) is on the case, writing checks as fast their little pens can scribble; it takes a LOT of checks (and no balances) to keep the zombie automaker from going belly-up. The press also realizes that something must change! But . . . what? Rick Newman over at US Snooze and World Report (that was unnecessary, but fun) reckons he knows what GM needs to do that it isn’t doing now. Do what the competition’s doing. Pedants note: Rick’s not suggesting ten new products. I think. He’s simply saying that the following machines are “some of the top cars from which the Detroit automakers can learn.” Presumption up with which GM’s top brass can not put. Presumably. Oh, and Rick, you might want to check the sales charts for some of these, and/or ping TTAC’s B&B for slightly more meaningful memes than Detroit hearts building big.

Honda Fit – “There’s nothing in Detroit’s inventory that comes close, because Detroit has long regarded small cars as a necessary evil, while importers know they can be fun and fulfilling.”

Volkswagen Tiguan – “Small vehicles can be just as cool as big ones. Cooler, maybe. The Tiguan is everything people are looking for these days: practical, fun, and modestly sized . . . [Detroit should] “match the flair, for less.”

Infiniti EX – “Quick, name a small, luxury domestic crossover . . . . Trick question. There aren’t any . . . . Detroiters might sniff that the EX isn’t a true SUV because it doesn’t have off-road capability. News flash: It doesn’t matter.”

Honda Insight – “Detroit needs to find a way to cut the cost of hybrids and crank out a dozen different models, or just hand over the whole segment to the Japanese.”

Audi A4 – “The most common complaint about Audis is that they’re overpriced—precisely the kind of problem an automaker wants to have . . . Strong engineering, slick interiors, and edgy design cues like the “eyeliner” LED lights that accentuate the headlamps have made the A4 a top-shelf alternative to more commonplace luxury sedans.”

Mazda MX-5 – “Ford and Chrysler in particular ought to pay attention—neither even offers a two-seat roadster.”

Volkswagen GTI – “The Chevy Cobalt SS is a GTI imitator, but it’s based on a middling economy car and isn’t nearly as refined. Keep trying.”

Hyundai Genesis – “Buick, Chrysler, and Lincoln might want to study Hyundai’s formula, which is to offer the same features and quality as the top Japanese and European brands for thousands less.”

Mazda 5 – “It’s small for its category, so Detroit’s probably not interested . . . Some analysts think the 5 may actually kick off a new “microvan” category, with copycats like the Kia Rondo. But no domestics, apparently.”

Subaru Forester – “You could pay more for a Chevrolet Equinox or Jeep Liberty, but you’d probably end up wondering why. GM and Chrysler should ask themselves the same question.”

Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 69 comments
  • George B George B on Mar 28, 2009

    The problem with attempting to copy cars from the list is that the copy will always be a generation behind the benchmark. The better idea would be to learn from some of these examples. For example, the main lesson from the Hyundai Genesis is large V8 RWD car AND upscale styling at a moderate price. The Pontiac G8 could have been built as a more upscale expensive looking Buick vs. Pontiac with "boy racer" cheap looking styling. Similarly, there is a theme of relatively small and fun to drive in the list. Would be nice to see a good compromise between refinement and cost vs. the current born to be a rental car domestic small cars. Maybe the US market will not support the cost of Ford and GM European models, but it will support a relatively fun to drive Honda Fit vs. the bland Chevrolet Cobalt.

  • Ctoan Ctoan on Mar 28, 2009
    Flashpoint If you feel like taking the semantics of my statement at face value, then yes, I suppose you could "mention them in the same sentence." Still, you were making a comparison, which is pointless when one car costs more than twice as much as the other. And, as I said, there are a handful of cars that will make it safely to 50k with absolutely no maintenance at all, if you're so inclined, and many more that will make it that far with only the occasional trip to the 15-minute oil shack. A car that can't do that is unreliable. I'm not sure where you've been hiding, but 50k is now a fairly low mileage, less than halfway and possibly a third of the way through the average car's life.
  • 1995 SC I don't know what the answer is, but out Germaning the Germans hasn't been it. Look at what works and do that (Escalade?). Maybe the world is ready for an option that just sort of shuts the world out at the end of the day and gives the driver a nice, supple ride home and is suited to the world that most people drive in.They won't though. The Journos will hate it and cry about ring times and at the end of the day that and dealers are who the cars are built for...not you. And Cadillac will likely fail sadly.
  • Daniel I couldn't agree more! As someone who is literally 100% brand agnostic, Cadillac is right up there with Lincoln for (relatively) very nice American brand designs and powetrains (OK, their sedans are getting a little stale with the same pointy, CyberTruck angles, but I digress) but their interiors really are absolutely lacking almost *any* differentiation from the "solid for what it is" Chevy parts bin and deserves better!
  • Fred Do what GM wants, cut costs. Pull out of racing hyper cars, defund the F1 program. Finally make more SUVs.
  • Cprescott I would do the following for Cadihack:[list=1][*] Make the V-Series as the base model and then add hybrid to the upgrade;[/*][*]Can the hideous Arts and Scientology (!) design disaster and bring out smoother yet crisp and sleek styling - no more boxes or tacky lighting. Let the body sculpturing win the day. I'd say take Audi and cross it with Genesis to give the vehicles stance and easily identifiable brand cues.[/*][*]Come up with interiors that are unique with quality materials and not something that looks like you ripped off Hyundai and Kia. The car must have four bucket seats that are all adjustable. [/*][*]Build to order. Get rid of this buying a Cadihack off the lot and sell at retail for a car built specifically for the client. Nothing makes a premium statement than a car built specifically for the customer - dealer will like because car will be sold at sticker.[/*][*]Expand exterior and interior colors and combinations.[/*][*]Share nothing with any other GM product. Each car / vehicle has to be a standout model even if the basis is common platform - if Hyundai/Kia/Genesis can pull this off, GM must be able to do.[/*][*]Do not mistake sticker price for luxury. The car's design and material integration will do that for you. If it does not feel, look, and smell premium, it is a Chevrolet.[/*][*]Special customer service - at the time of delivery, client gets to meet the service team that will deliver five years of complimentary service PLUS free tires for the first 50k. Special appointments and pick up car from customer and then bring it back. [/*][*]Loaner car delivered if vehicle is in the shop more than routine maintenance and picked up free of charge for first five years.[/*][*]Thoughtful design trumps technology. Vehicle should be intuitive to use and built to coddle the customer beyond his/her expectations. Vehicle must have "Wow!" - not just good enough.[/*][/list=1]
  • KOKing Kinda hate to say this but they need to be an American Land Rover sans the offroad image (and capability). Leave the Escalade alone and do a shrunken Escalade-esque lineup (the first time I saw a Hyundai Palisade I thought that was the XT6 that Cadillac shoulda made) and dump the alphabet soup models and trims.
Next