Buick's Avista Concept Seriously Pissed Off Some People at GM: Report

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

You remember the Avista — the sexy concept coupe unveiled by Buick at the North American International Auto Show in January (before being spirited away forever)?

Apparently, several people at General Motors weren’t happy that the concept’s shapely flanks and lithe profile saw the light of day, despite favorable reaction from the media. According to an uncorroborated source at GM Inside News, the Avista’s arrival was a blow to the team behind the Chevrolet Camaro.

GMI‘s source appeared on the website’s forum, and won’t reveal the actual source of their information. It’s known that the tipster wasn’t involved with the project. (Though his/her forum moniker — “Z284ever” — implies plenty of Camaro enthusiasm.)

The source claims the Avista was never supposed to happen, and “upper management” types were steamed after its release into the wild. Why the acrimony? It could be because public enthusiasm centered on a concept with no production plans, and not on another vehicle, the source implied.

Other forum posters rightfully point out that unloved concepts don’t just show up on a stand in the Cobo Center without the automaker’s approval. Clearly, there’s more to the story — if indeed there was backlash to the Avista, those voices were overruled. Rumors claim that recently retired GM design head Ed Welburn (who introduced the concept at NAIAS) could have something to do with the concept’s brief public fling.

If the backlash originated from the Camaro camp, it’s easy to understand. A restyled Camaro bowed for 2016, and a concept with no plans for production would take away its spotlight (and possibly humble its designers). If built, the Camaro and Avista would exist in the same segment, competing against each other.

But enough speculation. GM is staying tight-lipped on the claims, so the true story likely won’t be told until someone writes a tell-all book about their career. As for the Avista, most reasonably people gave up hope of seeing it go into production long ago.

Buick communication manager Stuart Fowle told GMI, “We don’t comment on future products as you know, but we’ve never suggested that the car does or does not have future plans.”

[Image: General Motors]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 88 comments
  • Nrd515 Nrd515 on Aug 07, 2016

    If they built this, and the trunk was usable for anything, and it was priced sanely, it would get me into a Buick dealership for the first time since the Grand National was cancelled. The Camaro design team should be forced to look at this car daily to see what a good looking version of their car could look like.

  • 415s30 415s30 on Aug 07, 2016

    I would never want an ugly redneck Camaro, that is the first modern Buick I have looked upon favorably.

  • Ltcmgm78 It depends on whether or not the union is a help or a hindrance to the manufacturer and workers. A union isn't needed if the manufacturer takes care of its workers.
  • Honda1 Unions were needed back in the early days, not needed know. There are plenty of rules and regulations and government agencies that keep companies in line. It's just a money grad and nothing more. Fain is a punk!
  • 1995 SC If the necessary number of employees vote to unionize then yes, they should be unionized. That's how it works.
  • Sobhuza Trooper That Dave Thomas fella sounds like the kind of twit who is oh-so-quick to tell us how easy and fun the bus is for any and all of your personal transportation needs. The time to get to and from the bus stop is never a concern. The time waiting for the bus is never a concern. The time waiting for a connection (if there is one) is never a concern. The weather is never a concern. Whatever you might be carrying or intend to purchase is never a concern. Nope, Boo Cars! Yeah Buses! Buses rule!Needless to say, these twits don't actual take the damn bus.
  • MaintenanceCosts Nobody here seems to acknowledge that there are multiple use cases for cars.Some people spend all their time driving all over the country and need every mile and minute of time savings. ICE cars are better for them right now.Some people only drive locally and fly when they travel. For them, there's probably a range number that works, and they don't really need more. For the uses for which we use our EV, that would be around 150 miles. The other thing about a low range requirement is it can make 120V charging viable. If you don't drive more than an average of about 40 miles/day, you can probably get enough electrons through a wall outlet. We spent over two years charging our Bolt only through 120V, while our house was getting rebuilt, and never had an issue.Those are extremes. There are all sorts of use cases in between, which probably represent the majority of drivers. For some users, what's needed is more range. But I think for most users, what's needed is better charging. Retrofit apartment garages like Tim's with 240V outlets at every spot. Install more L3 chargers in supermarket parking lots and alongside gas stations. Make chargers that work like Tesla Superchargers as ubiquitous as gas stations, and EV charging will not be an issue for most users.
Next