Just Say No: GM CEO Asked About Possibility of Corvette SUV

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

When Porsche introduced the Cayenne, the SUV was met with a sea of laughter. No one had attempted a sports-oriented utility vehicle before; on paper, the idea sounded totally daft. Yet Porsche quickly proved everyone wrong. Sales of the model have remained relatively consistent in both the United States and Europe since its 2002 production launch — paving the way for similar products around the globe.

While most of these models have taken the form of amped-up versions of mainstream SUVs and crossovers, a swell of performance utilities are blurring the line. Ferrari is supposedly working on an SUV called the Purosangue, Lamborghini developed the Urus, and Ford will reveal its “ Mustang-inspired” crossover later this month.

During General Motors’ third-quarter earnings call, one analyst wondered if the manufacturer wanted to follow suit with a utility vehicle modeled after the Corvette. Sure, it sounds crazy, but so did those other aforementioned vehicles at one time.

According to the Detroit Free Press, GM CEO Mary Barra dodged the question as delicately as possible. “I appreciate that you think our Corvette franchise is very strong,” she said on Tuesday.

While we understand Barra doesn’t want to paint the company into a corner, a definitive “not at this juncture” would have sufficed. Instead, she avoided the question by saying the company’s present concerns revolve around getting the C8 into dealerships.

From the Free Press:

GM is focused on launching the 2020 Corvette Stingray, said Barra. It’s the first-ever Corvette with its engine mounted behind the passenger — a midengined layout. GM was supposed to start building it next month, but as the Free Press reported, that will be delayed because of the UAW’s nationwide six-week strike.

An SUV variant of a Corvette would be a first — sort of. Other performance brands are venturing into that space.

Frankly, a Corvette-based SUV is difficult to envision. How Ford plans to pull off Mustang-ifying a four-door crossover leaves us scratching our heads, but the Stingray only amplifies those questions. It’s an absolutely terrible shape for a utility vehicle and has an engine in the worst place imaginable, now that Chevrolet has swapped to an MR layout.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t rule out the possibility of future products jacking its style. The new Blazer has precious little to do with the Chevy Camaro, yet the design influence is obvious. Maybe GM would do something like that with the C8 Corvette — though it still sounds like an automotive abomination.

While there’s no evidence to suggest General Motors has such a car under consideration, it’s hard to imagine the idea hasn’t been brought up. The automaker could simply be waiting to see how the public responds to Ford’s Mock E (or whatever they’re calling it) before revisiting the idea … assuming it’s a success.

“We look at a variety of things as we go forward and we recognize the strength of the Corvette brand,” said Barra.

Sometimes it’s okay to just say no. Outside of that one analyst, it’s doubtful many people are clamoring for a rock-crawling ‘Vette. If you have evidence to the contrary, we’d love to hear about it.

[Image: General Motors]

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 44 comments
  • Dal20402 Dal20402 on Nov 03, 2019

    I don't get this class of car but they are sure popular among very, very rich people in rich places. The fiftysomething finance industry multimillionaires around here all seem to drive either X5 Ms or the hi-po variants of the Cayenne. But I don't know (1) whether, even after the C8, "Corvette" is a brand that can attract that type of spender or (2) whether GM can cost-effectively develop a FR-platform SUV in the style of the X5 or Cayenne. I think they would have to take the CT6's Omega platform and raise it, an expensive proposition. I think it's telling that Cadillac declined to do so and released a blinged-up Acadia instead.

  • GoNavy99 GoNavy99 on Nov 04, 2019

    Odd article. First, it was BMW - not Porsche - which should be given credit for coming out with the first "Sports Activity Vehicle" (or whatever you want to call it) with the X5 way back in the early 2000's. Second, we don't have a "911 SUV," you have an "SUV by Porsche." By that measure, GM is doing just fine with its "SUVs by GM," so no need for a "Corvette SUV."

  • W Conrad I'm not afraid of them, but they aren't needed for everyone or everywhere. Long haul and highway driving sure, but in the city, nope.
  • Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
  • B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
  • Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
  • Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
Next