Hammer Time: What Should Have Been

by Steven Lang

Updated: May 16th, 2014 Published: January 13th, 2012

I remember looking at the then brand new Ford Five Hundred and thinking to myself, “This would make one heck of a Volvo.”

Like the Volvos of yore this Ford offered a squarish conservative appearance. A high seating position which Volvo’s ‘safety oriented’ customers would have appreciated. Toss in a cavernous interior that had all the potential for a near-luxury family car, or even a wagon, and this car looked more ‘Volvo’ than ‘Ford’ to me with each passing day.

Something had to be done…

Hmmm… why not subtract ‘twenty’ from the Five Hundred name. Call it a 480, and put in a nice classic Volvo styled fascia on the front end. Throw in an interior inspired by the best of Swedish design and, Voila! Ford would have offered a Volvo that would have hit the square peg of the brand’s main customers… and maybe even a few others who were considering an upscale Camry or a Lexus ES.

Sadly Ford never made a Volvo version of the Five Hundred, or the Flex for that matter. Instead they mis-balanced the diverging priorities of competing simultaneously with BMW (S40’s, C30’s, S60’s) and conservative middle-aged Americans who valued luxury transport over driving dynamics (Xc90, XC60, C70). The brand became a disaster.

I am starting to see the same ingredients mixed into other brands these days. Take for instance Scion.

Yes this brand will get a nice pop and halo in the form of the upcoming FR-S. Then again, halo sports cars that are shared with other brands tend to be short-lived. Just ask Pontiac and Saturn about the Solstice and the Sky.

So what would be the perfect car to put into Scion’s kinship?

Two years ago I would have strongly argued for making the CT200h a Scion. It didn’t have the luxury trappings of a Lexus. However it offered tons of sporting character and attracted the type of youthful and educated audience that Scion sorely needed at that point.

You know. The type of people that quickly walked away from Scion after they started marketing bloated SUV-like compacts that should have been marketed as… Toyotas… or Volvos. Who knows.

Wait a second. YOU know!

A lot of potentially great cars over the years have been marketed to the wrong brands for the wrong reasons. So I ask the B&B, “What cars were given the wrong brand, and where should they have gone?”.

Like most marketing classes in modern day MBA-land there are no right answers. Just SWAG’s and opinions. Feel free to demote a Cadillac to a Chevy if you must. So long as you can defend it, let’s hear it.

#Ford #GM #Hybrid #Industry #Marketing #Media #Nissan #Saab #Sales #Toyota #Volkswagen

Steven Lang

More by Steven Lang

Comments

Join the conversation

3 of 49 comments

Bkmurph on Jan 15, 2012

GM never should have foisted the Chevrolet Cobalt and Saturn Ion upon North American buyers. Instead, they should have given us the Opel Astra sedan/hatch/estate under the Chevrolet and Saturn brands. Maybe they could have sold the sedan as a Chevrolet and given the hatch and wagon to Saturn to capture the younger, more 'edgy' buyer. Maybe they could have given all three body styles to both brands -- it wouldn't be the most egregious badge engineering GM has done.

Like Reply
- Chicagoland on Mar 24, 2012
  
  Saturn did get the Aura hatchbacks, but they flopped. And were only sold for one model year. '08 I think should have made Cobalt just better over all, and not 'well at least it's better than the Cavalier!'
  
  Like
Servaas on Jan 15, 2012

Over here in the EU, Volvo's are hot. Lots and lots of them everywhere, great quality, great drive. All models have received updates, new models are here, looking pretty good. Disclaimer: I just traded in my 87 MB 300 for a 99 v70. And than I started noticing them everywhere. I'm amazed.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.