Whither the Minivan?
By Bob Lutz
GM Vice Chairman
Lots of minivan talk going on… let me just make one thing clear: Nobody said GM is getting out of the minivan business forever. We simply pulled a minivan option out of the running for one of our architectures. We reserve the right to initiate whatever future product programs we feel the market desires, up to and including new generations of minivans if we deem them necessary and desirable.
That’s really the key to everything, of course: the market. And we think the case for another new entry at this point in a market that is trending away from minivans just doesn’t make a lot of sense.
Look, the minivan was a great idea, and a fine product. It pulled Chrysler out of the frying pan during some desperate times. But obviously in recent years a stigma has attached itself to the minivan and won’t let go. Same thing happened to station wagons in this country before the minivan came along.
And beyond that stigma, the minivan is hurt by the many other choices available to customers. SUVs have been conquesting minivan sales for years, and now crossovers will take even more.
Our new crossover utilities — the GMC Acadia, Saturn Outlook and Buick Enclave — should not be compared to minivans; they are a totally different animal. But do we expect them to take sales from minivans? Absolutely. Just like we expect them to take sales from traditional SUVs.
These vehicles can carry eight people comfortably, have plenty of hauling space, and have a fuel-efficient 275-hp V6. And they have better road manners and vehicle dynamics than any minivan I’ve ever driven. Not that I’m comparing. But if I were, I know what would win!
These three crossovers will do nicely in the market for us, I believe, and, for now, we don’t see the need to offer minivans any longer, for many reasons. Do you?
John C
Bob, first of all, I agree that the Lambda based CUV’s will be all minivan owners could ask for, and then some. However, I do see a couple of small issues that (mini)van owners see as a benefit to owning one over a CUV.
First, the sliding rear door is something they really have become accustomed to, and second is the ease of removing the rear seats for utility value. I have also read where many GM fans have bemoaned the loss of a vehicle like the Astro van, which while not the best of minivans, seemed to have become a staple of small businesses everywhere. I see where you may (or are ) offering a panel version of the HHR. THAT is something I see as a step in the right direction, something geared toward those businesses. I suppose it is meant to be reminiscent of the old sedan deliveries GM built in the 40’s and 50’s., which makes me wonder if there wouldn’t be a market for a GMC Acadia 2 seat 4 door (sliding rear?) sedan delivery, with panels where the windows are. Think about it: similar in size to the old Astro, yet capable of 24 MPG on the highway? Better yet w/ an available diesel? Now, THAT’S what I’d call professional grade!!!
Dan M
Mr. Lutz,
I have contacted you before regarding the GM mark of excellence placement. That said, I feel the need to make another suggestion regarding minivans. I view it this way: even if it is a shrinking market, it is a market that will still exist much like the traditional full-size SUV market. I believe you said yourself regarding the large SUVs that GM’s plan is to “grab a larger share of a shrinking market”. That said, GM needs to take that attitude to the minivans and make them absolutely unstoppable. I have a feeling it is more of an issue of GM having no confidence that they can build a minivan that can rock the segment at its core. The company is obviously trying to regain prominence in the mid-size and large car segment, so why not try the minivans too? Why concede a million-unit market to Japan? GM could capture 25% of the van market and that is just that many more sales for market share and profit . I’m afraid GM cannot be choosy on which sales it wants. Please don’t concede 125,000 or more vehicles to Japan! Please feel free to contact me again. GM can do it!
H.A.A
Mr. Lutz
GM shouldn’t abandon the minivan market; minivans offer utility that even the new crossover trio can’t match, that is unless you offer them with sliding doors.
We all know that GM’s CSV’s aren’t the best offering currently in the market, but why give up? Now GM has what seems to be an excellent architecture (Lambda) and powertrain combo, why not spread the design costs and build new class leading minivans? Even if the market is shrinking it still exists, and with fuel costs, it seems a lot of people will switch back from SUVs to minivans.
Talis
I will agree with Mr. Lutz in that although totally turning a blind eye to the minivan market is not a good business case, and moving toward a new trend is (for right now) a good idea. I will say, however, that just like DCX (with the Dodge Magnum) has been able to recreate a demand for full sized station wagons, General Motors should try to be ahead of the curve and develop a minivan “to end all minivans.”
I believe that such a mini development (pun intended) could be a great asset to General Motors and to the automotive industry as a whole. Maybe a rear-wheel-drive minivan, which can be co-developed for use with full sized station wagons and rear-wheel-drive crossover CUV’s for economies of scale, can be put into the mix. doing so will give the “future GM minivan” an edge in the performance arena as well.
Think of what it would be like if General Motors produced the worlds first 10 second minivan! I am sure an Uplander SS, with 303hp to the rear, will change that stigma that everyone is so worried about.
Maybe Ford has the answer with the Mazda5 “nanovan.” If I am not mistaken this is the same vehicle as the Ford C-Max, a sort of tall, hatch-back, wagon, thing.
Although there is never really any clear answer, I think GM should not fall into the same trap that Ford might fall into, trying to get out of the minivan game and compete in the CUV game with too many other players. GM might be entering the CUV market with a lot of offer, but already Acura has the RDX and BMW has the x3 and many others will Mazda has the Cx-9 and Lincoln has the MKX. There are more to name but not enough space to name them.
I still like the idea of a SS minivan, just because we can do it. Maybe such a think can be based off of the GMT 360 platform when it goes in for a new generation.
John
Mr. Lutz,
I see a few problems with what has been announced. First off, my wife and I have had 2 GM Minivans (Pontiacs) and my wife wants another in about a year. She absolutely refuses to buy a crossover or SUV since they do not have sliding doors. We part 2 cars in the garage and have 2 carseats we have to get to. without access from the front of the door opening, a conventional door won’t do. Trust me, a conventional door won’t work in many parking lots, much less our garage.
I see this as a problem for many consumers. Sure there are less than a million minivan buyers now, but are you saying that Chevy can’t take 20%? Why can’t a Chevy minivan (rather than 4 brands) be built alongside the Lambdas? How hard would it be to take the existing platform, the Saturn liftgate and interior and change the sides and front clip?
Secondly, giving away these currently minivan customers to Chrysler is one thing. But there are many people who would never consider a Japanese vehicle. Most of them are probably midwestern and southern families. You probably have a map of where GM’s minivan buyers live. Well once you eliminate GM as an option, it comes down to Chrysler or Toyota/Honda/Nissan/Kia/Hyundai. Once they reject Chrysler, you’ve allowed that customer to “break the seal” and purchase Japanese cars in the future. I don’t think this is a small consideration.
Finally, there are many small businesses that rely on sliding doors and fold flat seats. Are they all going to get Saturns or is there going to be a badge-engineered Chevy?
Sorry for being so negative, but my wife is so disappointed, and I think giving up on minivans is a huge mistake. Even if it were just going to be a Chevy.
- John.
Chaz Smith
I do in so far as:
- GM is the world’s largest automaker and should offer a car for every need. I believe you said something along those lines shortly before the minivans were axed.
- As long as there is a market for minivans, and there still is, GM should have a product for consumers. What are Chevy dealers going to do with people who visit their dealership looking for a minivan?
- If and when minivans become trendy again, it will take decades for GM to produce one. By then the competition will own the segment and GM will be late to the party. GM should have learned that much after it mistakenly gave up on large RWD sedans and pony cars.
- Whenever GM leaves a segment to the competition, as it’s wont to do, it makes for bad headlines. A company on the upswing, as we are told GM is, doesn’t cut and run, it doesn’t give up. On the contrary, it produces more models, more brands, more variety.
- Imagine if GM could come up with the minivan equivalent of the Dodge Magnum! Take a seemingly dead segment and produce a paradigmatic vehicle. Now that is leadership.
- You know well that the decision to end development /improvement of minivans was taken at GM long ago, at a time when minivans were still selling- all to focus on trucks and SUVs. GM is a company large enough, with plenty of resources to work on several vehicles at the same time. It is nothing but luck that the segment is decreasing now and that it seems almost reasonable to kill minivans. It could have easily been otherwise and you’d still have axed them, but GM would have looked terrible.
Granted that the CVSs had to be killed sooner rather than later for they were nothing but trouble for GM and for the poor folks who bought one, management and marketing failed once again to make the news more palateable. Why not anounce that you’re retiring the current minivans to prepare more competitive ones. And leave open when those will arrive.
BTW, please don’t to the same with small trucks. One can already see that no domestic manufacturer cares about small trucks and they have handed the segment to imports. Why, who knows. Please update the Colorado/Canyon soon and make it class leading.
john
Bob,
I agree with you but one question I have is why does’nt GM offer any stationwagons? The concept of a stationwagon is really the best for most people. Car drivability with suv cargo space. I think most people are over the soccer mom image as minivans now carry the stigma. Wagons need style and luxury and people will buy. Woodgrain even looks good. Thanks
Tom
Hopefully all the comments on this one will actually be about Minivans.
About Minivans - I own one (DGC), I have three kids, and it is great. But, they need to be done absolutely perfectly to compete with the Sienna and Odessey. Until GM can do that, it’s better to focus on the other vehicles. Putting out a bad minivan is worse than not making a minivan at all.
Andrew Charles
“… market trending away from minivans …”? Which market is this? Sales of fullsize minivans have risen from under 990,000 in 2003 to over 1,075,000 in 2005. With the entire industry down this year it should be no surprise that minivans are as well, but despite that, and the impact of high oil prices earlier in the year, the only models to show sales declines are nearing the end of their product cycle or are being discontinued altogether.
Sales of compact pickups have been falling longer and further than fullsize minivans, and are already a much smaller market. The fullsize truck (pickup and SUV) market may be much larger but has also fallen longer and harder. For that matter fullsize crossovers such as the Lambdas GM is about to introduce (albeit to a segment with just two non-luxury offerings) have been hit harder than minivans this year.
GM may have smaller minivans up its sleeve less sensitive to fuel prices than the heavy Lambdas, but the fullsize minivan segment should not be abandoned. With the right product there are still steady sales gains, and good margins, to be made. The first to offer a hybrid in this segment will really clean up.
Edward Hayes
Okay, you are going to make long term decisions on last month’s sales and it’s going to effect you for the next decade, err forever. When you leave the minivan market you will loose three things…
1. Your ability to respond to that market.
2. Your excellence in developing that market.
3. Most importantly the perception that GM holds the excellence in that market.
In other words, if Hyundai said next year it’s going to produce a sports car better than a Corvette for equal the price, nobody is going to believe it. Now here is the most important thing here, watch this…
Even if they did do a car better than Corvette for a better price, still nobody will believe it. The car sits in the showroom, Why? Because when we buy a car we also buy the perception that goes with that vehicle. It is especially prevalent in that end of the market but perceptions are important in every market segment.
You don’t HAVE to do anything, but if you want to be the best, You got to show up.
In the end there is no disagreement because you probably produced a minivan off of an existing cheaper architecture. GM will figure out the minivan is a cheaper alternative to crossovers, and it will keep GM competitive in the value segment.
I just don’t want GM behind the 8 ball again, look Saab still does not have a crossover.
Remember this…
Before there was ever turmoil in the automobile industry, there was first turmoil in the product line. Toyota, no turmoil in the product line, the Camry what 30 years now on the market. Now true the market did evolve to crossovers and trucks. So what did Toyota do, no turmoil, it just evolved to include a number of crossovers while maintaning its other segments.
Toyota didn’t know anything more than GM about what would happen, but the difference was Toyota was ready for anything.
Fastlane short.
If you learn anything from this forum and what we are trying to get through to GM it is this.
WE WANT EVOLUTION NOT REVOLUTION IN YOUR PRODUCT LINE.
Because we care about the Camaro, Park Avenue, Taurus, Probe, minivans just as much as we care about GM and when we loose a piece of it we loose a little piece of ourselves.
DannyK
I’m sorry Bob, but I simply don’t agree with your corporate spin on this one. Having minivan in any mainstream automanufacturer’s product line is as essential as a clothing store selling socks and briefs. A minivan is a staple … a people mover … the current incarnation of the station wagon. Not having a competitive minivan in your line-up is like walking into a grocery store and finding out they decided to do away with the milk section.
My cousin used to own an Oldsmobile minivan (forget the name) and I once drove it (and rode in it) from Cleveland to Toronto. I thought even then that the product was sorely lacking in ride, space and comfort. GM has had plenty of time to come up with an alternative that would stand up to the competition. There is simply NO EXCUSE for coming up with a product that is not at least Chrysler-level in quality, ride and comfort.
Mac Fish
Mr Lutz:
I agree with what Bob said about the demise of the Astro/Safari vans and the lack of a suitable replacement. Our local telephone company had hundreds of the things. A stripped mini-van may be an alternative, but I can’t see the gargantuan, thirsty Savana/Express vans being suitable. Why can Honda do so well with the Odessy (built in Canada) and also why is Hyundai/Kia now entering the market with new Van products if this segment is a loser? I am a GM guy to the core. I have faith in the products you manufacture, but not much in your ability as a corporation to market them. You have excellent vehicles in other parts of your world empire which you should be offering in North America, but don’t. An example is the Holden Caprice. Front powerful engine, rear drive, beauty, sophistication. Just switch the badge to Chevy and theres a new Impala/Caprice.
jeff
First off - love the Astra, and I can’t wait to see the new Malibu - please make sure that these have the options that import cars have (nav, bluetooth). The should be options if GM is serious about competitive interiors. I think GM fell asleep at the wheel when it came to hybrids, and cutting out minivans seems to be a little bit of a knee-jerk reactions. There will always be a market for a minivan - why hand it over to Toyota or Honda on a silver platter?
Gereon Langlitz (Germany)
Dear Mr. Lutz,
this morning I was reading at the GM News, that the Saturn Astra will be available in late 2007. I think, that’s a great decision, which, without any doubt, will prove as right. Congratulations!
Like I mentioned before, I absolutely can comprehend your intention, not to spend more efforts, time and money on the development of vehicles, regarding a segment, which you don’t expect to prosper any longer.
Nevertheless I respectfully like to suggest not to leave this minivan-business completely. As I believe, GM at least could attempt to sell the Opel Zafira in the USA, maybe just as a trial, comparable to the times as the Pontiac (Chevrolet) Trans Sport used to be available in Europe. If the market would respond positively (shouldn’t be any surprise to me), GM could consider to let become the Zafira a valuable part of the Saturn-Lineup, what finally might lead to a decrease in certain costly over-capacities (as media reported) at your European assembly lines.
Thanks for paying attention.
Dsuupr
The sliding doors are wanted, and the reason friends of ours went with a minivan rather than waiting for the GM cross-overs.
Keep in mind that people who have minivans have more than just a minivan in the driveway. If they go to honda for the minivan, why not just stay with honda for the family sedan?
Jack
Bob,
I recall you talking a while back about “the great products coming out,” which included the current minivans. Well, how wrong you were, and they have turned into Super-Dogs in the marketplace. A rolling advertisement for what’s still vividly wrong with GM.
GM’s decision to give up in the minivan area is not surprising. The new GM, is still the old GM, which clearly lacks the confidence (not to be confused with arrogance) to give this segment a good competitor. Not surprising, based on GM’s long resume’ of failure in this segment.
Minivans are strong segment, 1 million units per year, this is opposite of your PR department’s fragile spin to those without the facts. The list of the top 20 vehicles sold in November (Autodata Corp.) contain FOUR minivans. The Dodge Caravan, Toyota Sienna, Chrysler Town & Country, and of course, the Honda Odyssey; grand total 654,340 units for 2006 YTD.
Compare that to your 20k Solstice production, 20k GTO, and the other high effort/low return/low volume pet projects. You clearly don’t understand the buying habits, or needs, of the non-wealthy crowd.
Greg
My only concern about your discontinuing the minivans is that you are removing a vehicle choice from the mobility/paratransit market which is sorely needed.
Yes, I know that you still have the full size Express/Savana, but not everyone wants a full size van for this purpose.
Greg
Eduardo Alvarez
I have been a long time DCX minivan user in my personal life, with a family of 5.
When it comes to hauling my family’s stuff, NOTHING comes close to a minivan. SUV’s (except the very largest ones) and crossovers do not have the space behind the third row to accomodate our bags and gear. Without a third bench the kids (young) fight all the time.
Recently we had to buy a minivan for work and our leasing company provided a GM product.
I was impressed with the interior, the level of accesories and the drive.
Improve your products and stay in the minivan segment. Practical people need them.
Dave
Bob,
The lack of a minivan (per se) may be OK, but you need something else with that utility. I have a 5-year-old Venture that is really tough to beat for utility and fuel economy, but is still a bit oversized for most things we use it for. I have also spent a fair amount of money on tire/wheel/suspension upgrades just so I feel I can survive potential emergencies going down the road and not create another one.
Possibly I would go for a big wagon in its place - maybe instead of a Malibu Maxx there should be a Malibu wagon. But really, if you brought the Opel/Vauxhall Zafira here, I think you’d hit this market right on the head. People want the utility, but don’t want a sloppy-handling, poorly packaged vehicle. I’ll take a Vauxhall Zafira VXR with the DOHC 2.0L turbo and sport chassis for the win, thanks.
Oh, and I live in Michigan, where many people buy your products regardless of what you build. But I’ll put good money on much higher demand on the coasts, where the present vans do very poorly. You already have the product, you have to want to win here and BRING IT, Bob. I just don’t see why this is so difficult to execute.
V@z!R..................
- GM exited the small car business (& you had to buy Daewoo to bring ‘em back to America!)
- GM exited the pony cars market (and look how many fans switched loyalties
- GM exited the large RWD sedans market (& look where the Germans are now)
-GM exited the hybrid/electric market after the EV-1 (& look where Toyota and Honda are now)
and now………..
- GM exits the minivan business
Same trend, same future - the lessons are there for anyone to see.
edvard
Mr Lutz,
I can see the obvious reasons why removing the minivan your current lineup would be a motivated step forward. Many of your points are excellent and pointed. That said, I don’t see a clear path forward towards replacing this segment with a real potential vehicle type.
If you look at some of the greatest selling vehicles of the past 20 years, Most were in truth amazingly boring yet truly innovative vehicles. The Taurus saved Ford North America by being the first truly modern family sedan. Chrysler was saved by the minivan. In each of these cases, these vehicles filled a need and desire with consumers. There was an immediate connection with the buying public and they functioned in an almost strictly utilitarian manner.
Your suggestion that the market needs more crossover vehicles might be on target, but in my opinion these crossovers are somewhat cloudy in their purpose. They aren’t cars, trucks, SUVs, or luxury cars. They are remarkable only in that there isn’t anything that interesting about them. They perform no defined function. They are in my opinion the epitome of generic.
Now if I had the perfect idea of what the next revolutionary vehicle was- a product that would perform the magic of the minivan from the 80,s, I’d tell you. I don’t have that answer, but I can give some real-life experiences to give you some insight.
First of all, I am glad to see that GM has been doing some case studies concerning the differences in vehicle tastes in North America. I think that more needs to be done in this area. I am originally from North Carolina and moved to SF, California. Vehicle preferences couldn’t be any different. Back home there was still a strong almost patriotic sense of buying domestic cars and trucks. The majority of vehicles were domestic as well. Not so in California. The equation is totally reversed. Instead, the majority of cars on the road on CA are Japanese and European vehicles. People want to be perceived as ’smart’, and buying a domestic vehicle for some reason isn’t on their radar. You can sell these people Audis, VWs, Mercedes, all day long. It doesn’t matter that most of these Euro brands are mechanical disasters. They are seen as chic and smart. In general, there is a general distrust of domestic brands here. This can be said for most other ‘blue’ areas of the country.
So what can GM do about this? What’s needed is either a new brand, a new vehicle that appeals to this segment of the population while at the same time producing cars that the rest of the country likes. In my opinion, GM is already 75% there. What people in major metros like these days are vehicles that make a powerful statement about the environment- like the Prius. if GM were to step on the gas and start introducing truly technically innovative cars and trucks before the Japanese did, they could reestablish themselves in these import-happy zones.
That’s just one part of the equation. The 2nd goes back to my initial reasons for writing this post: Invent an entirely new kind of vehicle that hits all the points: innovation, utility, economy, and usefulness. Again, I have no idea what this kind of vehicle might look like, but if you are going to replace the minivan, then why not fill the void with a brand-new idea… not car/truck/suv… things.
good luck.
Corto
To John
GM has a great station wagon with oodles of space, very comfortable seats, more highway passing power than a Porsche 911 and yet gets over 30 mpg, 5 star safety… and REAL wood trimming to top it off. Unfortunately, it’s the best kept secret of the automotive industry. It’s called the Saab 9-5 Sport Combi. Don’t test drive one if you are not in the market for a new car…because you will end up buying it. If you want the same in a smaller size, there is also the Saab 9-3 Sport Combi.
BTW Mr Lutz: please import the breathtaking Saab 9-5 Bio Power and take advantage of Sir Richard Branson’s commitment to bio fuels and the Saab 9-5.
Corto
Bonjour M. Lutz,
1. 99% of the posters seem to disagree with you on this one. For sure, sliding doors are a big issue.
2. At the LA show, your CEO made it clear GM wanted to become part of the solution to global warming.
So why not take the lead and produce the first environmentally friendly minivan ! That would be a bold statement and it would sell !
I also believe the Zafira would fit neatly in the Saturn line-up. You need to have something better than the Vibe (I know, we have one) to compete against the Mazda 5 and others.
Curtis
I have to agree with the comments made regarding what a mistake it would be for GM not to be in the minivan business. Do it right and don’t delay and I think it will be successful. There is a market as already noted. GM just needs to have the confidence and determination to create the product.
Did I mention don’t delay?
soccer mom's hubby
What about Chevy? No minivan, no llambda vehicle, Tahoe and Trailblazer are trucks and won’t reach the same buyers.
I know GM can’t do everything at once, but I haven’t heard any official plans to give Chevy a minvan replacement. Is there a plan?
andrewtamas
Bob,
I think its great that GM is producing these new lambda crossover utilities. Remember your 3rd law of business, “When everybody else is doing it, don’t!” It makes sense that GM is pulling out of the minivan segment, and while some may look at it as a sign of regression, i look at it as i sign of leadership and progress. Instead of investing heavily in a segment that is no longer viable, GM is setting the pace, making people movers trendy, stylish, and innovative with Lambda. We recently recieved an OUTLOOK this past week at our Saturn dealer, and from the tight fits on the dashboard to the refined engine compartment packaging, we cannot find anything displeasing about this vehicle…SERIOUSLY! Some customers may complain about sliding doors, that’s why i think it would be neat to assign GMC the task of creating a spin off of the sliding door on the Acadia, seeing as it would go well with GMC’s innovation in truck engineering. I’m only 19 years old and never have i been excited about a people mover!
These new crossover vehicles will take these three brands to people and places that they have never been before!!
inline6
Mr Lutz,
I cannont blame your company at all for replacing the poor-selling Relay, Terraza, and SV6 with the Outlook, Enclave, and Acadia. Those decisions make sense. However, I have to agree with many people here that abandoning the minivan segment entirely is going to be a mistake. It’s true that GM has NEVER really been competitive in this arena. That’s unfortunate. However, the winds of change are blowing at GM, and I would think that you would be able to produce one that is at least on par with the competition, for the Chevrolet (and maybe Saturn) brand at least.
If the Lambda platform is too bulky, why not use the Epsilon II? What about a joint-venture with PSA, Fiat AG, or Renault? And why not bring over the next-gen Zafira as a Saturn?
GM could come back from the dead in this segment. I understand that you guys don’t have a lot to lose by abandoning it. But I can’t help but feel that you’re throwing away a chance to win by quitting in this segment. You’re also laying out the red carpet for whatever retail minivan customers you do have to beat a path to Honda and Toyota showrooms. Over the last 7 years, minivans have accounted for 2.5-4% of your company’s sales. And truth be told, the Lambdas will probably (hopefully) do better than that for GM.
But I don’t buy the idea that the minivan market is shrinking enough to abandon it. It’s a bigger segment than full-size SUVs, albeit with more competition.
However, some consolation comes from the idea that, by not investing in minivans, your company will have more time and resources to produce class-leading products in ever other segment. See that you do.
karl
“These three crossovers will do nicely in the market for us, I believe, and, for now, we don’t see the need to offer minivans any longer, for many reasons. Do you?”
Yet another mistaken notion that “people will buy whatever we make”. No, we won’t.
That attitude has gotten GM in trouble before, and will again, sadly…
Greg W
My wife and I have 3 young kids, and we will need to buy another minivan to replace our F*rd Windstar in a couple years. If GM offered a Chevy Lambda (or any other GM brand) with sliding doors, we would buy it in a heartbeat (pardon the pun) without reservation. The only reason we wouldn’t get a Lambda CUV is the lack of sliding doors. Keep up the good work!
Jim
How about one good minivan instead of several sub par vehicles. The current crop are all just warmed over version of the last one. Dump all but the Chevy and make it a winner.
We will be in the market for a new van and with GM out, looks like Honda will get my money (for the first time ever). A CUV just doesn’t offer the flexibility and sliding doors that a minivan does. Mr. Lutz, have you recently put a car seat in? Give it a try in a CUV and a minivan. Not as fun trying to fight that hinged door and getting the seat latched.
Like someone else said, a minivan will break the seal. Makes it much easer to justify the second car going to Honda too.
Brian Compton
Mr. Lutz,
I do not agree with you - though I hold you in the highest esteem. The Lambdas are terrific but cannot match the utility of a vehicle with power sliding doors and low-step in height. You can rationalize all you want but you cannot convince me that these are not desireable attributes.
Why does GM need a minivan? Because I need a minivan. Because American families need a minivan. Since, I will not be able to get one from you, I will default to the best on the market - Honda Odyssey. I want to hang in there with you but you’ve cancelled the Malibu Maxx (great concept, poor design execution) and now the minivans.
Rather than running in the same direction as everyone else (CUV’s) how about going where they are not? Innovation, not imitation. Have you been in the Mazda5 or Passat Wagon? I have and they are great.
The REAL loss to GM won’t be me. It will be the next generation that grows up in Honda and Toyota minivans and develop an affinity through this exposure. My daughter may be parking her Civic between my Odyssey and Camry.
Johnny Smallblock
I’m a GM guy, from my ‘72 Cutlass to my Vette powered ‘96 Caprice. But I don’t need to prove something with the car I drive. And after having owned a tall wagon I really came to love the utility. And when I have kids (about 2 years away) I will buy a minivan. I hope GM offers one. Otherwise I’ll look elsewhere.
SUVs and CUVs have cramped interiors relative to their size and gas mileage.
CUVs don’t drive like cars, only more like cars than SUVs do.
I live in Manhattan, and like most other New Yorkers, I have no plans to own more then 1 car (excluding any classics or project cars). The minivan offers more room then anything else, is easier to drive then a CUV or SUV, is safer (especially with its lower center of gravity), and doesn’t carry the stigma of someone scared to be seen in a minivan.
I don’t see why a minivan is hard. They’re all the same dimensions, styling is dictated by function, throw in a few rows of folding seats, 250hp, and some auto opening doors and you’re done. Wow everyone with automatic foldng and unfolding seats as an option.
Like I said, I hope I can buy one from GM. If not, I will actually feel bad, but I will spend my money elsewhere.
Mac Fish
Me again, Bob:
Earlier I mentioned our phone company and their hundreds of Astro/safari vans. Just saw its replacement. Dodge mini-van with blanked out windows. By the way this phone company is national in Canada (I think about 8 million customers), so their buy would be huge.
Mac
Mark
One way to guarantee continued shrinking marketshare is to exit large market segments. Is GM not big enough to offer a product for every market segment. Stop thinking like you own 10% of the marketplace.
Mark
Adam Wadecki
Bob–
The Lambda CUV’s look great, but they’re HUGE!!! When are we going to get a vehicle that weighs under 4,000 lbs again?
On another note, why not make some more station-wagon-like derivates off of this platform (i.e. AMC Eagle)? As a younger individual, I think it would be nice to drive a tall, 4WD, fuel efficient CAR, not a sport utility. I’m so sick of the wallowy handling and geriatric steering ratios.
Subaru has been eating up this market for years, why not offer something that looks good (their cars are ugly) off of the Lambda platform and get about 50,000 sales/yr?
KD
GM should not abandon the minivan market, it will be a mistake in every way. Our family needs a van for our business and have been loyal GM buyers for over 10 years. No new van means we have to buy Chrysler or something else, business lost forever. Even if an Outlook was an option, it costs thousands more than a van.
Whether GM does a joint project with Europe (Opel) or with Nissan, get a replacement to the Uplander ASAP. Any van is better than none, extend the life of the Uplander if time is needed to figure it out. You abandoned the Camaro and market share was all lost to Ford, don’t give the competition another free pass to take GM business.
Gereon Langlitz (Germany)
Concerning the previous comment:
“- GM exited the large RWD sedans market (& look where the Germans are now)”
For your information: The largest German car-manufacturer VW/Audi doesn’t offer a single RWD sedan. And that’s the same with Opel and other important European companies. I also like RWD sedans, but in my opinion these are absolutely not decisive referring to success or failure of any car-manufacturer. At the times as GM moved towards FWD vehicles, this had been popular in Europe, either.
By the way, GM at least started offering Hybrids. But I can’t see a German Hybrid yet…
Christian Aviles
I just went to the LA Auto show, and based on the Saturn Outlook, GMC Acadia and Buick Enclave I saw there, I agree wholeheartedly. Those are some great products, I was quite impressed. Hopefully the market will agree, I do think they help fill the mini-van void in a GM line-up and they do it exceptionally well.
On a side note love the Pontiac Solstice GXP except for the honeycomb grill around the foglights. I think it takes away quite a bit of the classiness of the styling on that car. The Solstice GXP-R at SEMA had a much better designed grill for those vents and I also loved the spoiler on the GXP-R as well. I think you should consider styling the GXP based on that car for 2008.
talonsaab
Bob, heres an idea, slab some sliding doors on one, I said one of the Lambda CUVs and be done with it. Maybe lower it a bit. Keep the seats, cockpit, front doors, front end…etc. Change a few trim bits and be done with it. Low cost low investment, build it on the same line. Could be the best handling minivan ever.
Gary Dikkers
Bob Lutz said, “But obviously in recent years a stigma has attached itself to the minivan and won’t let go.”
Mr Lutz,
I’m sure all those driving the many Honda, Toyota, and Hyundai minivans I see them commuting in would appreciate knowing that GM thinks they have a stigma attached to them.
Would you please be more specific and explain exactly what that “stigma” is? (My dictionary says “stigma” is a mark of infamy, disgrace, or reproach.)
As Mr Langlitz of Germany said, the answer is right under your nose — made by your Opel division in Russelsheim — the Opel Zafira.
Why not just have your Russelsheim works make the Zafira to U.S. specs, then bring it over here and let your Saturn division sell it?
That leads to an even bigger question I suppose: Why do your overseas division such as Opel and Saab seem to be making better autos than your U.S. plants?
Best regards,
Gary Dikkers
B. Magee
Mr. Lutz,
I’m a current Honda Odyssey owner who would have a Benz R-class in the driveway if finances permitted… but they don’t. The Odyssey as a total package (including value for the dollar) I feel is the benchmark in the segment. I mention the R-class mainly because of the performance characteristics (availability of a V8, 7-speed auto, suspension design, etc…). My ideal minivan would combine the features and functionality of the Odyssey with the dynamics of the R500; but only if available in a vehicle that was reasonably priced given the content (lower $40Ks fully equipped). Whether a business case exists for the vehicle being described I don’t know, but this would be a class leading vehicle if priced properly.
GM already effectively has a potential performance minivan hidden in the WM Statesman car. The overall length and wheelbase are virtually identical to the Odyssey, and the width is close (about 2 inches narrower than the van). Modify this platform to accommodate all the necessary large minivan capacity features: higher roofline, 2+2+3 seating, ability to remove or hide flush all mid/rear seats for cargo/utility purposes, and have some available storage capacity when all 7 seating positions are in use. Maintain the same drive train configurations as deployed in the Statesman: RWD with large V6 or available V8, 6L80/90 tranny, IRS supporting class II towing, etc. The only modification of power train would be the availability of AWD for the folks in the Snow Belt, but that should remain an option and not be the only configuration as RWD provides better efficiency and towing capacity. Also, cylinder deactivation would be needed on the V8 to keep highway fuel economy reasonable (mid 20s). I can think of several markets (NAFTA, Europe, Australia, Middle East, China) where seemingly enough of these could be sold globally to justify the project.
Some reading this might say, just buy a Yukon and be done with it… there are some of us (like myself) that just simply do not like driving trucks. Compared to frame rail SUVs with live axles, minivans offer a unibody vehicle with the same interior capacity, much better handling/ride/dynamics, better crash performance, and at least equivalent (usually better) acceleration with much better fuel economy; the only things given up are towing capacity and off road capability. Sport wagons are another alternative that cover the performance requirements, but they simply do not offer the utility, space and comfort of a large minivan. I don’t believe GM currently has a large crossover platform (like Lambda) that supports longitudinal power train/RWD, so a WM-based minivan/crossover could be a viable way to fill the void in the segment should the market exist for it.
beken
Mr Lutz,
You’re right. There is no reason for GM to be in the minivan business. With all due respects, GM’s minivan offerings were ugly, handled poorly, and were unreliable. What could you folks have been thinking when you rolled the current generation out the door? One of my best friends had a Montana and it spent most of the time in the shop and it never got fixed. GM kept telling him nothing was wrong but it kept stalling on the highway. He’s gone and traded it in for a Toyota since. GM’s offerings were, to put it mildly, uncompetitive in that market. You had two choices. Stick to your guns and fix the problems and refine the product until it is BETTER than your competitor’s, or pull out of the market. GM has taken the easy route and pulled out of the market. Which market will you pull out of next? You and Mr. Wagoner both know that GM comeback was not going to be easy.
Your recent announcement regarding bringing in the Astra was interesting. I talked to a coworker who originates from Britain and he just laughed. Me? I have fond memories of owning a Pontiac Astre at one time (sarcasm).
Myself, I’m not a minivan buyer. But I do know of those who have good reason for needing a minivan and not a CUV/SUV…UV.
GM needs to build good product that people want. They need to be persistant, build it right and stand behind their product. I can’t believe with all those market analysts and great engineers you have on staff, you can’t design a great car. I can’t believe your bean counters can’t hold the line on costs without totally messing up a good concept. But yet, that’s what GM has done the last 20 years or so. Good try on the Solstice but not quite good enough. As a car guy, I kind of hoped you would help GM get its mojo back.
By the ways, in case you’re thinking I’m just an import buying GM basher, I’m an original owner and still have one of the very first Pontiac Fieros with a V6 in it and also have a late model Buick which has turned out to be the most troublesome car I have ever owned, as quiet and comfy riding it is. More like I’m a disillusioned GM supporter that is running away.
mtndrew1
Coming from the Los Angeles show on Wednesday, I must say the Outlook was by far GM’s best effort.
The GMT900 SUVs were ok, but nothing spectacular. I had high expectations based on what I had read, but they certainly didn’t knock my socks off, particularly in the interior (where most GM product needs the most work). Even in the Escalade, the doors sound clunky and loose when they close, many of the materials are sub-par, they still use the absolutely ancient “almost comfortable” GM tilt-wheel assembly. These SUVs weren’t terribly space-efficient, either.
The Aura was better, but not by much. It’s a giant leap from the L-Series, but it’s still no Camry or Accord inside. Add in the pushrods and old-tech trans, lack of bluetooth and nav, and I can see why its sales declined from not-spectacular launch levels after just a few months on the market. Not a bad looking car though.
The Outlook and GMT900 pickups were another story. The Outlook in particular was well put together and spacious. Dash and door panel materials were of a high quality and seemed uniformly assembled. The instruments looked sharp, the switchgear felt pretty good and nothing felt particularly chintzy.
The GMT900 pickups were very good overall. The base interior is inferior to the F150’s and ‘07 Tundra’s, but not by much. The uplevel interior is nice, but seems out of place in a truck. The GMT900 pickups seemed better assembled than their SUV platform-mates, but still suffered from bad-old-American-car door sounds and that wretched tilt-wheel. Body assembly was very nicely done, the paint seemed rich and nothing fit improperly. I think these will sell well, but after spending some quality time in the new Tundra, I do think GM and Ford will lose a couple hundred thousand sales to the ‘Yota. The Tundra looks MUCH better in person than in press photos, the interior was very well done, the whole thing was well assembled and there are a number of innovative detail features. Huge crowds were around the new monster Toyota with lots of positive comments flying around. There were far more positive comments around the Tundra than there were around the new Sierra and Silverado.
Where I wouldn’t choose an Aura over a Camry or Accord, a Silverado over a Tundra or a Cobalt over a Civic, I would be likely to go for the Outlook over a Highlander or Pilot. It’s that well-done. There’s a small handful of cheesy GM crap in the Outlook, but you have to look for it. Between the well-baked interior and the high-tech running gear, I think these Lambdas will be genuine contenders in the marketplace.
The one thing I really wish GM would get their act together on is the key. Why do they insist on making them out of the same crappy plastic my ‘98 and ‘00 Saturns had? Within a week it looks furry and scarred, and they don’t look all that hot when they’re brand new in the first place. My Honda, Mazda, VW and Toyota all had/have beautiful keys that look nicer than those included with even a $60,000 Escalade. The Outlook is good enough to deserve a new key to go with its competitive duds.
B. Magee
Well, after my last post realized GM is indeed doing a RWD/AWD Sigma based crossover (GMT265/267) as the Cadillac SRX… I’d erroneously thought the SRX was AWD Lambda (GMT960). And its dimensions/features/performance are very close to what I brought up earlier (but a bit smaller dimensionally). And it apparently is class leading according to Car and Driver. However, fully equipped it retails near $50K… going head to head with the R500 and putting it out of reach of most minivan customers. I still maintain that coming up with a stretched VE/WM or future Global Volume RWD non-luxury minivan variant to reduce production and retail costs (vs. the Sigma/SRX) is worthwhile… sold in various markets globally in quantity for those desiring a powerful RWD/AWD minivan. The architecture and mechanicals of the Statesman apparently would form a good foundation for such.
Rick Lupori
Mr. Lutz: The Lambda platform does provide best in class room and rear seat access but the lack of sliding side doors will keep many buyers away from this excellent product.
The ability to open the doors in the close quarters of a mall parking lot and not having to reach around a door to keep hold of active children is a desirable (and many cases MUST HAVE) feature.
Sliding side doors can remain open while parked without worry of the doors being knocked off or in the way eliminating the constant opening and closing that can catch small hands.
GM has eight (8) brands in the U.S. and a dozen worldwide; surely one out of a dozen could offer a minivan for U.S. and worldwide sales. GM does sell Buick minivans in China.
Chevrolet is the global brand for GM and has a long history of being a “family friendly” division making it the perfect choice for this assignment.
You said “These vehicles can carry eight people comfortably, have plenty of hauling space and have a fuel -efficient 275-hp V6. And they have better road manners and vehicle dynamics than any minivan I’ve ever driven.”
Sounds like GM has created the ultimate SWB minivan it just forgot the sliding side doors.
Can you really say that putting sliding side doors on the Lambda architecture will ruin it?
Maybe it should try to classify it as a FAV (family activity vehicle) or something else - any ideas from the other bloggers?
Many bloggers have been on GM to make a class leading vehicle since this blog started, well GM has a SWB minivan that can dominate the segment with a blend of driving dynamics, optional V-8, Twin-mode Plug-in Hybrid and AWD powertrains, class leading interior comfort and quiet.
The Lambda seats fold flat and the only drawback (going by limited published stats) is not being able to fit a 4 x 8 sheet of plywood with the rear door shut.
I would suggest GM add sliding doors (with ROLL DOWN windows) to the current Lambda and offer it ONLY as a Chevrolet.
If it sells well, GM can make a LWB minivan with added length and additional storage on the next generation.
Having the minivan should not keep Chevrolet out of the Crossover market.
Cars and vans have used the number of doors, type of roof and overall length the difference between vehicles why not do this by changing the type of door in place of the number of doors.
Is this so different from the Trailblazer and Trailblazer EXT or the Caravan and Grand Caravan?
Chevrolet can offer both a SWB minivan and Crossover on the Lambda architecture and if sales justify it offer a LWB minivan later.
What sales numbers is GM looking at?
YTD sales of the Odyssey, Sienna, Sorento are up and the new Entourage is doing well.
Chrysler minivan sales are down but the basic design is 10 years old so a sales slowdown is expected. Chrysler is also coming out with an all new design in 2008 which will boost sales.
Ford gave up on minivans but can only blame itself, no advertising and an ill advised name change killed their entry. Many buyers have trouble keeping the Freestar and Freestyle separate and this confusion did not help launch the Freestyle.
Can’t tell you when I last saw a Ford or GM minivan ad, but I see ones for the foreign makes just about every day.
The domestic minivan sales are dropping from old age and neglect, not because no one wants them.
As others have pointed out the young families that buy foreign minivans will give that automaker first chance at any other sales and many loyal GM buyers will join them because sliding side doors are something they must have.
Can’t think of a better way to get rid of buyers than refusing to offer what they NEED.
Hasn’t GM turned enough buyers against it?
Does GM really want to alienate 25 to 35 year old buyers?
Besides, when did 100,000 to 200,000 annual vehicle sales turn into a bad thing?
Design_Kid
GM’s minivans have been cheapened by the countless rebadged & facelifted versions of the same old car!
The minivan can be a very functional, fresh and desirable car if its done right.
It would be great if GM focused on producing ONE trully great new car-like minivan that slotted into the appropriate brand - with no rebadged versions.
Then, the minivan could be book-endded by a trully great SPORTSWAGON and a trully great CROSSOVER
Alex
I recently rented a 2007 Uplander. I was totally impressed by the driving performance of the car. I found it a better handling car than my SUV. Despite this, I agree that it is better to focus on smaller number of car types and try to make the remaining car segments the best in the class. For instance, the money spent on upgrading Uplander is better spent on building an outstanding sedan.
John in Buffalo
Bob,
GM gave up on minivans years ago when GM decided not to be a market leader or a least make a competitive model. So you just making it “official” now. About 6 years ago we were interested in the Oldsmobile Silhouette. The great people at the dealership let us take the car home. This was before GM came out with the 24 hour test drive. I’m 6′2″ and I could not get the driver seat to go back far enough. On long trips it would have been a killer. We ended up with a very nice base level Ford Winstar. We added tinted windows and had my 6 disc CD player put in the car.
When our lease expired on our Winstar we got a Saturn LW300. It is my wife’s primary driver and she loves it. She is only 5′1″ and never liked the truck-like ride over the minivan. She didn’t like parking it or backing up with it (this is also true of an SUV/CUV). We love the car-like ride of the LW300 wagon because it is a car.
Our lease on the LW300 expires in July 2007. We are leaning toward the Saturn Aura. But a sedan doesn’t offer what we like in a wagon. On long trips we bring along a large cooler with food and we put it behind the back seat so it’s accessible. That won’t be possible in a sedan.
If we wanted a GM wagon are choices are limited The Cadillac SRX (expensive, poor fuel economy, tough to park and back up), Chevy HHR (too small), Chevy Mailbu Maxx (too ugly), Pontiac Vibe (too small, although I might get one to commute in), Saab 9-2X (too small), Saab 9-3, 9-5 Sportcombis (premium fuel).
From the rest, The Audis (too expensive), the BMWs (too expensive), Chrysler PT Cruiser (too small like it’s twin the HHR), Dodge Magnum (too big/ugly), Ford Focus (too small), Mazda (we had a Mazda years ago and didn’t like the car or the local dealer), Mercedes-Benz (too expensive), Scion (too small), Subaru Impreza (too small), Subaru Legacy/Outback (maybe!), Suzuki Forenza (no thanks!), Toyota Matrix (too small like it’s Vibe twin), VW Passat (my wife really wanted this when we got the LW300, so maybe!), Volvo V50 (maybe), Volvo V70/XC70 (too expensive).
Now an Aura Wagon would make us say, where do we sign.
pdbw
Well, I confess, I thought there would be a mixed bag of comments on the “let’s hold off on minivans for a while” strategy, but this board seems full of passionate, rationale, dat-driven, supportive, well-spoken comments asking GM to reconsider. Perhaps GM needs a younger parent on its leadership team (e.g, with kids under 10) to understand the implications of not having that sliding door/removable seats combination in a lineup which otherwise seems to address just about every other consumer need.
Kudos to GM for asking the question about the elephant in the room, as it were–now let’s hope this promotes some active discussion down at the Tubes.
noel park
I followed a Mazda 5 on the way to work this moring. They are going to sell a lot of them.
The 5 has received really good reviews in the automotive press. It has a lot more design content (hello Mr. Lutz) than past mini vans. It is somewhat smaller, thus lighter, thus more fuel efficient.
As many of the above bloggers have said, there is a big segment here. I don’t get it.
V@z!R nailed it at at 10:38 AM on 12/8. Thanks.
jtov
My answer to your question is, yes there is a need for GM to build a minivan. The advantages of the of rear sliding doors are well documented, and do not forget the advantages of the remote operation that Toyota touts today in their advertising, even though GM was first to market with this feature. You say you are not abandoning the minivan market, just “pulling that option out” for now. What ever words you use, it sounds like GM will not be in the current minivan market with a competitive vehicle. I read that the new lambda platform was designed to accept a sliding door. I hope this is true, for if the lambda vehicles are as good as the initial write-ups indicate, I cannot imagine not doing a sliding door considering the size of this market, the obvious inherent advantages of sliding doors for certain markets, and the ability to have this feature without having to design an entirely new vehicle. That to me is what I would call a home run. As previous comments noted, in what US markets is GM going to expand. Has not GM also decided to discontinue midsize trucks, leaving that market to Toyota, Nissan, and others. If the case is that a class competitive vehicle can not be built, then I agree do not build it. We all know that does not work.
John
But when do we get the big hp, RWD, stick-shifted, Minivan SS?
That would be the ultimate Walter Mitty vehicle.
Edward
Bob,
Do not give in to other automakers. Do not pull out of the minivan Market. Neither should you let the Frontier and Tacoma hack you to death in that Segment either. I bought your stock a while back. You have done me proud. do not let me down
Meanwhile, I do not know about you, but, I would be working hard to bring to Market a Diesel Hybrid H2.
Joe Gakenheimer
Yes! From a business point of view.
Do I want one? No. Do I want a new Lambda? I think they are drop dead gorgeous, even the Outlook is growing on me. The Acadia in burgundy is an eye catcher and looks more sophisticated and sharp than about all the competitors luxury offerings. But hey, I am a single guy who is a one man gang; no more no less.
As a business case I think a FWD only version of the Lambda’s, if allowable with the current Lambda is still needed. Why? I feel a need for a cheap version of the Lambda that is a family hauler, yet easy on the wallet. Of course there could be top of the line models, but most models be in the mid to high 20k’s; for example with Saturn, positioned between the Outlook and Aura. To me a minivan is something that is cheap to own, comfortable, family friendly, gets very good gas mileage, and as very utilitarian; things I don’t see the new Lambda’s all do, but do other facets much better. I also think it would be nice to see real cheap version of a minivan for delivery service only. I am a government worker and see no reason our people must drive large SUV’s when there could be something similar to the old Chevy Astro deliveries and work related responsibilities.
That is what I see and would think such a vehicle could sell 100k units a year. I just hate seeing the competition re-badging and doing slight exterior changes to their products to have a minivan, SUV, and a pickup and get away with it.
But kudos on the new Lambdas, they are very impressive.
Chris R
While I would certainly understand the need to reduce the number of minivans GM builds, by eliminating all versions but Chevy. Entirely eliminating them is somewhat questionable. It is merely a market that is smaller than it once was. It isn’t exactly dead. Though I do agree that the current minivans aren’t competitive. Perhaps a change in direction might be in order. The Zafira would indeed be something to consider for the US market, perhaps as was suggested, as a trial to simply see how well the US market takes to it. Another possible direction would be an actual successor to the Astro. RWD or AWD, a modern V6 it would be suitable for both commercial use, as well as personal use, and would lend itself for conversion to serve the mobility/paratransit market with minimal modifications to the vehicle itself. There is a need for a small van, but maybe it doesn’t have to be a traditional FWD minivan. Maybe it can be something else.
bosco
Mr. Lutz:
I love your CUVs’, they are great. When I pointed one out to my wife are the Miami International car show she really loved the Saturn Outlook until, that is, I told her it had no sliding doors! She walked over to the Honda and Toyota displays. Think about it. She wants one by 2008. Will GM be ready?
Beaugrand
Let me see if I understand this: you’re abandoning the minivan market and the Million!!!! annual customers it represents, yet you’re hanging on to the 40-50,000 H2 Hummer market???
Somebody PLEASE explain this math to me…
big kal
Mr.Lutz I see the new platform for the next gen minivans. The Lambda . It’s a good platform. I see your three cuv’s looks nice. Don’t like the back end.But good job
RJ
Posted this on another GM feedback site, but I think it bears repeating:
Speaking with my 20 something female friends and my new bride, GM is going to have to come up with a vehicle solution that incorporates at least one sliding rear door. Despite the dumpy image of the traditional minivan, there is no better / more practical solution for mom’s wrestling with a stroller, shopping bags and car seat / baby carrier, other than a push button sliding rear door (especially in tight parking lots). I know the minivan market is shrinking and there isn’t a lot of profitability left, but as gen-Y reaches child rearing age, GM runs the risk of losing an entire generation of young women to the Japanese, Kia and DCX.
Buckle down, figure out a way to share engineering and component investment with Lambda and devise clever seating / convenient door solutions (e.g. stow & go, honda’s lazy susan and key fob sliding doors) or the Mom demographic (a very important target demo) will reject GM permanently.
BTW all of the challenges of child care and reasons to own a mini-van apply to young fathers as well (in case you think that the commentary is sexist), but practicality typically overshadows image stereotypes for auto shopping moms, whereas fathers will likely need to be “convinced” of the virtues of a mini-van by their spouses.
chris
i was sketching tall wagons while i was in high school in 1996. i still wonder about the popularity of coupes where there is a back seat.
here’s a gimme: a kappa based 2+2 with ohv v6. 30+ mpg personal transportation, simple and tidy interior, lots of gm aftermarket parts.
and how about making summer tires AND (a second set of) snow tires standard on vehicles in the north-east? tcs, abs, ebfd etc are no good when ‘all season’ tires crap out below 40F. let people know that awd isn’t a safety feature!
mojojojo
I think it is a mistake to abandon the minivan segment completely. You will lose the brand loyal customers who need minivans to another company and they may not come back. Rather than abandon the segment I think it would be smarter to focus on designing less minivan-like minivans. In my opinion, the current minivans are failed attempts of doing that.
I recently heard that Opel is working on a new crossover vehicle. I was wondering if this car would come over to the states as a Saturn. If it does wouldn’t it overlap too much into the Outlooks territory or is this going to be a replacement for the outlook by the time it arrives. I think the Outlook is a big crossover that doesn’t really fit with Saturn’s brand image of a small car maker. IMO the outlook should have been a Chevy and the Zafira should have been brought over here.
BerettaGTZ
Mr Lutz,
Like many other previous readers, I am extremely disappointed at GM’s decision to exit the minivan market. Even with declining sales, the minivan is still a pretty substantial market, and by getting out, you are leaving potentially up to 100,000 loyal GM customers without a replacement. There are lots of families with young children or older parents living with them who would never consider a crossover because they don’t have power sliding doors. Remember, these are the young, well-educated, upper middle class customers GM really needs to win over and keep for life. You’ve just given them a perfect reason to shop Toyota.
The minivan market is much larger than the 2 door sports car market, and yet GM creates an entire architecture for the Solstice but can’t find it within themselves to do a minivan off of an existing one.
Hyundai recently launched 2 new minivans and Nissan and Honda just spent small fortunes to improve their existing ones. Apparently they see a future in this “declining segment.”
Rick Lupori
Mr. Lutz: The sliding doors on minivans give them unparalled ease of access and GM must offer at least one vehicle equipped with them. Failing to do this will cost GM well over 200,000 sales a year because the young families that NEED this feature will go to competitors and buy minivans and other vehicles from them for the next 20 years.
Adding sliding doors to the Lambda platform will have little if any impact on the excellent driving dynamics you describe, and the front styling can stay the same.
Maybe GM could call them MPV’s but that name has been taken.
As for Crossover sales maybe GM should look at these numbers Pacifica, Highlander, RX330, Touareg, MDX and Freestyle sales are down. Only the Pilot and Murano are up and not by much.
Crossovers will be separated into segments and a crossover with sliding doors would be a “Family” Crossover opposed to the Enclave that would be considered a “Luxury” Crossover and the Acadia Denali that is a “Sport” Crossover. By adding a Chevrolet model with sliding doors it will fill a segment of the Crossover market and Chevrolet could still offer a Crossover with regular doors in the “Value” segment.
I would hope GM decides to stay in the minivan business and offer a world class minivan from the Epsilon II or Lambda architecture.
Rick Lupori
Mr. Lutz: The lack of a replacement for the Astro is another example of GM leaving a market segment and loyal owners without a vehicle.
There are quite a few Astro and Safari vans around Southern California and even a good many Aerostars. These vehicles are getting old and their happy owners will be hunting for replacements but will not find any.
A competitive Astro van could be developed from a shortened GMT900 chassis with a 116″ wheelbase of the Tahoe or 119″ one from a short box regular cab Silverado. The rear suspension would be shared the Tahoe for light duty and AWD models and the Silverado for heavy duty or 10 passenger models.
This would cost next to nothing to develop and GM would have this market to itself, and for once not leave loyal GM owners out in the cold.
GM would not only keep these loyal buyers for new Astros but have first chance at any other vehicle they will need, and every Astro I have seen parked in a driveway was at least one other vehicle parked next to it if not two.
Rick Lupori
Mr. Lutz: Station Wagons are another segment GM gave up on years ago in the U.S. market even though it offered vehicles in it.
I cannot recall ever seeing an advertisement for a Saturn SW1 or LW300 and SAAB ads never show the 9-3 Sport Combi or 9-5 Estate.
The last wagons GM made in any numbers were the Buick Century and Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera. These were good wagons and I still see many on the road even though they went out of production in 1996. There is one running around the Pittsburgh area that is pushing 400,000 miles and still going strong.
GM still offers Astra and Vectra wagons in Europe and Berlina and Acclaim RWD wagons in Australia
Why can’t GM offer the Astra and Vectra wagons as Saturns?
GM could make an Astra based ‘54 Vette inspired “Nomad” concept of a few years ago if it will not make one from the Kappa.
The new Vectra model is much better than the old LW300 and has an enormous amount of interior space. Saturn could at least make “Tall Wagons” like the Outback from the Astra and Vectra and with an AWD option have competitors for the Subaru Impreza and Legacy.
Maybe GM should call these vehicles Sport Combi’s like the SAAB to reduce the “Station Wagon” stigma.
The Holden RWD wagons could be sold as Pontiac models to compete with the Magnum, BMW 5-series wagon and Mercedes E-class Estates.
The Holden Ute and Crewman could also be sold as the new El Camino.
The best wagon GM could make would be a 55-57 Nomad styled one based on the GMT 900, a short SUV instead of a “Tall Wagon” if you will.
Not only would it have the style of the old Nomad, extended cab style rear doors permit easy access to the rear seats while maintaining the great styling.
This “Station Wagon” would not only sell well it would bring in thousands of curious buyers into Chevrolet Dealerships for a closer look. Conventional rear doors could be added later if sales allowed. Any cost of development would be shared with Coupe, Sedan and Convertible versions.
Rick Lupori
Almost forgot about the Zafira, it should be a Saturn for sure. The OPC and Turbo-Diesel versions would be great alternatives for buyers needing 7 passenger capacity but need high MPG.
You talk about sales, the Zafira is one of the best selling vehicles in Europe and it sales are up strongly this year. It has conventional rear doors but that is OK, GM could offer the Combo for buyers needing sliding rear doors.
The Combo is currently only a 5 passenger, but has sliding rear doors and a cavernous cargo area for it’s size. It could be offered as a 7 passenger like some of the Renault and Fiat models.
It is even offered in a LPG model and the cargo models would be attractive to inner city delivery businesses like they are in Europe.
BubbaGump
Bob
I think letting the vans go or not go requires alot of ponderance. Gm needs a revolutionary minivan. Design something unique with a 4 liter flat six and a five speed in it. really cab forward the thing. Go for it its out there just waiting.
John Varga
Man I just don’t buy this line at all. Being a family that has two mini vans between my wife and myself not to mention other mini vans in the related family. First of all nothing can beat a mini van for all around usefullness. The side sliding doors are better for getting in and out than any other door out there. Try opening the door of a conventional SUV in a crowded grocery store parking lot. It just dosn’t work very well. Not to mention the power sliding doors of the newer mini vans. They’re great when you have your hands full. Power side doors on a SUV?
Back seat accessability in a mini van is way better than say, a new GMC Acadia. I’ve crawled in the back of both and the mini van wins hands down.
Consider this. Car sales were stagnant and losing ground. Did GM abandon cars? No they have, and continue to come out with new and innovative products. The result? Increased sales.
Now what would happen if GM came out with a new innovative design that had ideas/styling that people loved. Hmm, maybe increased sales?
Build the best mini van on the market and slow sales won’t be a problem.
GMr
Speaking as long-term GM buyer, it looks like I’ll be buying a Odyssey or Sienna. You execs, thinking the current GM minivans, or even the “unreachable MPG claim” Lambdas, could compete with them, is the “height of stupidity,” (a favorite phrase of yours, Bob). Retire, already, before you do any more damage to GM.
Kevin Smith
For the rest of the auto industry (especially the imports):
When at first you don’t succeed, try try again. Last time I looked they continue to gain market share.
For GM:
When at first you don’t succeed, graft on an ugly front end and call it a “sport utility van”.
When at second and you don’t succeed, concede the market to your competition and ignore the buying public.
Bob, I think you’re too blinded by the GM smokescreen that you have around you, or perhaps it’s lack of oxygen from living in the vaccuum where these decisions apparently are made.
Time to show your guts.
Gereon Langlitz (Germany)
To “mojojojo”:
The new Opel-crossover you recently heard of, obviously is the Opel Antara, which is already on sale over here. I don’t know of any other upcoming future vehicle from Opel belonging to that segment. Referring to the latest pictures I could see at US-websites, the Antara looks like an identical twin to the next-generation Saturn Vue. Only the tail-lamps look slightly different. I hope the Antara will also be available with the Vue’s hybrid, since this would be very favorable regarding Opel’s reputation as a technology-leader in Europe.
Buick Diesel
This article puts Bob’s comments into perspective:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/08/AR2006120800768.html
It basically says that the minivan is dead - 850,000 sales in 2006 vs 1.4 million in 2000.
Given the market, it’s no longer cost effective for 3 or 4 divisions to offer a minivan, but if Chevy offered one and got just 20% of the market, that’s 170,000 annual sales. If the market really falls off and drops to 500,000 annual sales, that’s 100,000 sales for Chevy.
Matthew Keller, NY
Mr. Lutz,
Don’t forget this….. Chrysler is working on a new van….WITH VeeDub. If you just look outside, look at a good part of suburban neighborhoods, you’ll see that a good amount of them Chrysler, and GM. Now, I know I’m not the first to say this, but I’m also sure you would agree that GM’s past minivans were, lackluster to say the least. These will not replace minivans in your lineup. Just don’t make the same mistake that Ford is making, also replacing their minivans with the Fairlane people hauler. If you are going to make another minivan, dont use the SUV snoot on those god ugly things you sold as Buicks, Chevrolets, and Saturns, and Pontiacs. If you do make another, keep it up to par with the current slew of vechicles that are coming out.
Thank you for your time.
gtjeff
I had read where GM planned to be in every market segment, what happened?
GM hasn’t put enough effort or resources into this segment. Just like what happened in the pony car segment. No fold into the floor seats. The style on the four snout nosed clones just isnt there. Who approved them? I thought the days of badge engineering were gone.
The Venture had a decent following, but that recognizable name is gone.
It is all about meeting and exceeding customer’s needs and wants, not telling the customer what to buy.
Andrew Charles
To Gereon Langlitz (Germany):
The crossover being referred to is something like the standard swb Mercedes R-Class–i.e. more like a typical upper-midsize European MPV than an SUV. We don’t expect anyone from GM to officially comment on it yet, but it is expected to be sold by both Opel and Saturn. While it will be only one of several such MPVS on Europe, it will be unique in the US market now that Mazda has decided to phase out it’s MPV rather than introduce the new model already sold in Japan.
Paul
We’ll be in the traditional segments… we’ll be in emerging segments… high-volume, niche-market… you name it – we’ll be there.
You know who said that, Bob? You did. Back on 10/18.
indi500fan
I remember driving the original plastic bodied minivan with the stylized side door window profile. Being 5ft6in tall, it seriously obscured side vision when another car was along side. I thought: this car is probably 60% intended for women who tend to be shorter - did any of them drive one before it was approved for production?
Then I saw the second generation van (which persists today with the new front end - 10 years later). How narrow it was compared to the competitors. Almost 6 inches less than the Honda.
If a new small van program is ever attempted again, make sure the targeted audience drives the prototype and benchmark successful competitor’s dimensions.
Jon
A lot of people have chimed in, but I thought I’d add my $0.02…
To give you some perspective, my dad is a GM-retiree, and I grew up in an “all-GM all the time” family. Since I graduated from college, I have leased 3 consecutive Pontiac sedans, and our 2nd car is a Volvo station wagon (we got a good deal on it, and it has been very useful for us). We are expecting our 3rd child next year, and our current Grand Prix lease is up in March ‘07. We need to get something bigger than a 5 passenger vehicle, and we are not happy with the SUV’s on the market — it’s too tough trying to put a car seat and infant/toddler in the 3rd row. So we’re looking at minivans. Even though we are likely considered “upper-middle class”, we can’t afford a new vehicle, so I’m looking at used minivans. The current crop of GM minivans do not have good quality, reliability or resale values, so unfortunately we are probably going to be looking at a Japanese brand, or even a Kia.
The new Outlook/Acadia look good, but as has been mentioned previously, they don’t have a rear sliding door(s). If GM ducks out of this market segment, we will likely be forced into buying foreign for the forseeable future (until our kids are grown and I can justify buying my 2025 Corvette).
My other problem is going to be how to explain to my dad that we won’t be buying a GM vehicle…
Mark
To recap overwhelming majority of comments:
1. The minivan segment is growing, not shrinking with increased sales of the Odyssey, Sienna, Sedonia, Entourage and Quest as examples.
2. Minivans have features (lower load height, stow & go seating, sliding side doors, more usable space) that suvs and cuvs cannot match.
3. A lot of buyers who are loyal to GM will go elsewhere to buy a minivan as opposed to buying a Acadia or an Outlook.
I have come to the conclusion that the reason that you are discontinuing work on the Lambda minivan is that GM can’t afford it. There is no way that GM would walk away from a large segment like that if the resources were available. If you don’t think that a class leading minivan would sell 150,000 - 200,000 units then you and your brain trust don’t know the auto industry as well as you think you do. Just please don’t insult our intelligence and tell us that a 1 million unit market is shrinking!
Davidjs
Mr. Lutz,
I have to agree with many of the posts here, GM should have a competitive minivan available. GM must compete in all market segments, it’s just hard to fathom that GM would ignore/drop out/give up on such a significant and relatively stable market segment. The full size SUV market that GM dominates and has spent considerable money on product is not much larger than the minivans, and that market is declining.
Families that buy minivans also buy sedans, compacts, etc. to compliment the van. GM has a better chance of gaining those sales if they can provide the van in the first place.
It still puzzles why after 23+ years, GM still does not have the best or truly competitive minivan available. Don’t give up, challenge yourselves to produce a van that makes the others want to study and copy what you made.
Thanks for taking on this subject.
David
J.Crew
Hey Bob, I see a twinkle in your eye when you wrote this… you just were trying to get feedback as I am sure you are working on a fantastic Chevrolet minivan for the near future. Putting everyone off the scent for a little bit can’t hurt the design process either as DCX will be launching there new designs in Detroit in a few short months. It is obvious that GM can and will design a class leading minivan with your guidance as all the recent products have had a the new emphasis on tight fit and finish, great interiors, and suitable powertrains.
One request - please drop the 3.6L into the Torrent and Equinox asap. I can’t believe you allowed Suzuki the first crack at that - even if it is under license. That is your engine and it needs to be in those two porducts to help compete with the RAV4 and trump the CR-V with its 4cyl only option. No need for a turbo 4 like Acura and Mazda though, but that may not be a bad idea for the Pontiac to differentiate itself - drop in the 2.0L Ecotec from the Solstice GXP… flights of fancy I am digging into here.
Keep up the good work!
robert farago
Cut and run, eh? No surprise there.
JW
Mr. Lutz,
I’m not sure who at GM is telling you what you’re hearing but I believe they are very wrong.
1. THERE IS NOT A HUGE STIGMA attached to driving minivans anymore. The consumers who might have cared about that are probably the ones who have already left the segment. Moms and Dads alike understand the usefulness of sliding doors and the low liftover and high height back ends. Although, I wouldn’t choose one to drive everyday, I don’t take care of the 2 kids and their friends all day long. There is no longer a stigma to owning a minivan, and with the popular Odessey, it’s even become fashionable in some circles.
2. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR SLIDING DOORS. Try putting a car seat in or a child into a carseat, with a conventional door in a parking lot.
3. Today’s consumers that buy a Honda minivan because they can’t get one from GM will not be back for a GM minivan in the future. And once they’ve bought a Honda minivan over a GM, they’ll likely consider an Accord over the Malibu. Then their kids grow up in Hondas. What do you think their kids will buy in 15-20 years?
4. A minivan does not have to be styled any differently than the Lambda CUVs. Don’t let anyone fool you into thinking a Chevy minivan has to look unique. Take the Outlook, change the grille and headlamps, add some sliding doors, and keep the Interior, the roof, the front doors and the rest of the front end and tail. Do what it takes to make a profitable minivan. Don’t skimp on the features or compromise the utility, but don’t let styling dictate major costs.
5. GM cannot grow marketshare, even “organically” by eliminating potential customers. GM has only one entry in the small car segment, seems to be planning an exit in the small pickup segment, has nothing in the RWD ponycar segment, seems to be exiting the midsize BOF SUV segment, and is now eliminating it’s offerings in the minvan market. The Lambdas seem to be great vehicles, but I don’t think they can come close to making up the lost sales of Envoys, Rainiers, Rendezvous, and all the minivans, meanwhile stealing sales from the GMT900s.
Ford is exiting the segment leaving some conquest potential, spyphotos of the next Chrysler minivan seem to show that they missed the styling mark by a lot, and Honda’s minvan is well into it’s lifecycle. Next year would be the perfect time for GM to offer a new minivan. Considering defectors to other brands for a minivan, defectors who then buy a competitor’s sedan, and the children of these defectors, I believe this decision is much bigger than whether you sell 150,000 minivans next year. Please reconsider.
Keith
Pheww. Quite a response on this topic!
My wife loves Saturn, so we looked at the Relay before we bought our Sienna. The lack of fold away seats was a deal killer for her. She also required 8 seats.
If the Outlook was out and it had an option for sliding doors, it may have gotten our business. She still talks about the Ford Freestar as being a cool option that didn’t quite meet the minivan functionality.
Don’t lecture me about pillars and manufacturability either. You have tons of quality Mech Es who would love to create a trim level or option for the Lambdas that included sliding doors and fold away rear seats.
-Keith
Gereon Langlitz (Germany)
“Why not just have your Russelsheim works make the Zafira to U.S. specs, then bring it over here and let your Saturn division sell it?
That leads to an even bigger question I suppose: Why do your overseas division such as Opel and Saab seem to be making better autos than your U.S. plants?” - Gary Dikkers
Hi Gary,
thanks for supporting my proposal. But I wouldn’t go so far, saying generically, that Opels and Saabs basically would be better than the vehicles from GM NA. As I believe, both worlds, the American and the European, have certain strengths and at the same time have to work on improvements specifically. So I think it would be the best for the prosperity of GM to combine the expertise from the different regions (not to forget the Australian). I am looking forward to seeing the first Astras, when we’ll visit Florida the next time. But at the same time I would like to see the Aura on our roads, replacing the current Vectra (at least as a stopgap), which seems to be a little slow-selling in the meanwhile, although the Vectra is a true high-quality vehicle. But to me the Aura simply appears more stylish than the Vectra or Signum. The Opel GT (Saturn Sky) for sure also will do great over here. So I am convinced, the joint operations of Opel and Saturn, which GM actually started, will be very favorable for both.
Bwright
Bob,
As was posted by Buick Diesel the minivan segment has in fact suffered a precipitous decline. A large part of this is just the image of the minivan which is widely reviled along with stationwagons.
So I can certainly understand the business justification for your abandoning ship so to speak. But on a personal level I think the perception is that GM has been beaten back or has somehow retreated in defeat from a segment that it should and quite frankly could be competitive in.
With the Corvette GM demonstrates every day that they can build a class leading vehicle. One wonders why the General cannot assemble a team with a similar take no prisoners approach to carefully study the segment leading minivans from Honda and Toyota and then deliver a counterpunch that garners respect and awards the way the Vette does.
If GM got 25% of the minivan market that would still be over 200,000 units. Perhaps make two or three variants. A luxury variant from Saab, a mid-level variant from Saturn and a base vehicle for Chevy. Equip them with standard disc brakes with ABS all around, standard curtain airbags, 6-speed automatic and a class leading 6-cylinder with Displacement on Demand. Make things like xenons optional at least on the Saab version and then show some genuine innovation. How about an underbody undertray storage area for something like a stroller when the vehicle is fully loaded with passengers and space behind the rearmost seats is at a premium? Failing that the storage area could be a decently sized fold out section from the lower flanks in the vein of the McLaren F1 supercar. I always hear minivan drivers complain that when they actually have seven passengers aboard they really need storage space for all their gear but can barely get everything in.
Then focus on making the best handling minivan possible. You want the buff books to comment on how well the thing handles relative to the competition. This means keep weight down and make sure the suspension is well sorted. Don’t stop until the GM minivan can put 3-5 seconds on a comparable Odyssey around the Lutzring.
Every dynamic parameter (acceleration, braking and handling) of the GM minivan should clearly be better than its competition while beating them on mileage (DOD) and offering innovative storage solutions for active familes.
Make XM and OnStar standard and give the minivans a wide stance on fairly aggressivly sized wheels and tires. Limit the chrome. Use double-paned glass and generous applications of Quiet Steel and soun deadening to make it the quietest interior in the minivan class. No fake wood on the interior. Genuine leather throughout (even in the last row) when ordered. Headed seats for all positions and the seats should power fold flat when needed (option). Navigation should of course be an option.
Don’t be afraid to price the GM minivan right on top of its Asian competitors. You have to get out of the mentality of being America’s discount automaker and instead focus on competing on merit.
And of course, make it as stunning possible to look at. Impossible for a minivan? I would have thought the same of a Buick truck and then I saw the Enclave. Clearly where there is a will there is a way. GM just apparently does not have the will to refuse to lose.
Bottom line, benchmark the best minivans out there with the same fervor the Corvette team assigns to competing sports cars from the world’s best. Then, in the same vein, build a class leading vehicle to send the competition back to the drawing board while working the buff books into a frenzy of praise for your efforts.
Again, this is done for the Corvette on both road and even more emphatically on track. Why can’t the other GM divisions do this?
Jon
Bob,
Now I know you guys are not bringing any Front-wheel drive BLS here to compete with the 3-Series!!
Even the A4 is a disaster saleswise!
Use the Torana platform to within a inch of its life and get us here a properly-sized, Awesomely-styled 3-Series beater!
It must just annihilate the 3-Series and all other members of that class. In every way. Period.
And then give us the BLS-V to cream the M3!!!
No FWD!!
Love,
John
Andy
“Lots of minivan talk going on… let me just make one thing clear: Nobody said GM is getting out of the minivan business forever.”
Yeah, but it should. GM never made a good van, I’m sorry to say. My mother and stepfather (a former GM management figure who has since retired) owned two. One was a Chevrolet in the mid-Nineties and the other is a Pontiac they bought new a couple of years ago.
My mother regretted the buy when gas jumped. I detested the d***** thing. The interior plastics were hard and cheap and the seats were stiff. She is now on the market for a small sport-ute. As for the old Chevy, the electric sliding door always broke, no matter how often we sent it to the dealership.
GM is making nice CUVs, a market segment that is growing. Minivans are fading. Dodge, Chrysler, Mazda, Ford, and even Nissan have had a hard time here. Leave it to Honda and Toyota to make minivans.
Chris R
Bwright:
Saab does not need a minivan! Technically, they shouldn’t have that rebadged, slightly restyled Buick Reineer either. Saab should remain a maker of very fast, mid to high end front drive turbocharged performance cars.
Dave
Bob,
I’m a Chevrolet dealer from Northwest Wisconsin. The minivan market is still a significant market in my area. I’d love to see a lambda Chevrolet with sliding doors. Make the sheet metal different from Outlook, Acadia and Enclave — maybe use Sequel styling — don’t rebadge. Offer it with an optional dual mode hybrid v-6 and let Chevy be first to market with minivan hybrid. Following suggestions of many of above posts I believe Chevy can beat Toyota and Honda with a properly designed minivan. Sliding doors would also play well for commercial market ala HHR Panel. I’m hoping you’ll take the challenge and get it done soon!! We want the kids in our market to grow up riding in a Chevy Van.
Here’s another thought. Put sliding doors on the Zafira and bring it over as a mini minivan that gets over 30 mpg. Position Chevrolet as the entry family vehicle brand.
Thanks for listening.
DM
Joe Lauerman Jr.
Bob,
So, let me get this straight - you are bowing out of another market segment. Nice. Yes, GM is on the road to a solid comeback!
Let me ask you a question - how did Toy/Honda gain control of this segment? I doubt they had your cut and run mentality.
Why is Kia now entering this market?
What do you expect - ancient drivetrains and lackluster design - of course you will lose market share!
Why don’t you take a lesson from the #1 auto company, Toyota.
What did they do when the T100 failed? They tried again with the Tundra. That didn’t meet their expectations either so what did they do now?!?! They hit the books hard and looks like try #3 will be a winner!
Good for them. They deserve it for trying so hard.
JWilly
I’m a guy that drives a GM minivan as my winter car and year-round stuff-mover. It’s optimum for my guy-needs. I like the way the AWD versions drive, and I have fairly high expectations…my summer car is a Boxster.
I like buying GM. I’d be ready to buy a 2007 if I could. I hate GM’s seeming abandonment of the minivan segment.
CUVs, for me, are NOT good substitutes for minivans. They’re too short behind the second row. I’m not interested in moving stacks of drywall or circus animals, but occasionally I do need to move long equipment, or go shopping, or take a prototype and a couple of associates to a customer site. I want the convenience of cubage and length.
Pickups drive badly, and don’t offer me either a shared-interior cargo space or a good on-road AWD package. They’re too high, and waste length…I don’t communicate my masculinity by the length of my hood. Suburbans and full sized vans are ponderous and clumsy. The perfect form factor for me is a long minivan.
Who decided that the minivan concept should look like a car and be designed solely as a mommy-mobile, anyway? Minivans, functionalized up and re-concepted, should have co-existed all along as guy vehicles. The minivan offers the perfect canvas for designing an anti-design, i.e. high function and rejection of the car look, i.e. the Scion xB but with more functionality and features, for guys with bigger stuff, families, more safety concerns, snow to drive through. In the life of the concept, why didn’t anyone pick up on that?
It’s tough being part of a segment–guy minivan buyers–that’s considered negligible.
J.Crew
Ok, I had to repost again in regards to my earlier request of putting the 3.6L in the Torrent & Equinox…you announced you will install it in these products this past week, just after I posted it. Well, just in the Equinox Sport model. Very cool. Please do something with the AIRBAG COVER ON THE PASSENGER SIDE of the IP. It is a nasty flat black that needs some attention. It looks like cheap plastic. I am not one for tack on gimmicks, but this needs something. …will this be announced next week too…? ha ha
Beaugrand
Perhaps there is wisdom in the tail-between-the-legs retreat from the small car market, the small pickup market, the minivan market- I don’t see it, because GM’s designers and engineers are world-class, because GM manufacturing people- yes, including the UAW members- are among the world’s most talented and productive, because GM dealers can sell even the latest mediocre GM offerings- but perhaps there is wisdom in admitting defeat.
And with that wisdom, eventually GM may proudly join that honored roster of car manufacturers that folded, not because they made bad products, but because their leaders made bad, bad decisions.
It’s a pity because some of the most memorable cars in my memory are GM products- 1949 Chevy sedan, 1950 Buick Sedanette, 1955 and 1957 Chevy Bel Air, 1963 Riviera, 1965-69 Corvairs, 1970 Camaro, and many, many more… but I realize the need to play it safe, to downsize and focus on making only high-margin product like Corvettes, SUVs and Silverados.
That should put GM in about 10th place in the rank of car companies, but that’s a safe strategy- leave the small cars, the small trucks, the minivans to companies that still have the will to make excellent product.
Bruce Sherman
John wrote:
“She absolutely refuses to buy a crossover or SUV since they do not have sliding doors. We part 2 cars in the garage and have 2 carseats we have to get to. without access from the front of the door opening, a conventional door won’t do. Trust me, a conventional door won’t work in many parking lots, much less our garage.”
He is absolutely right. We are buying a new car now and I have shown my wife EVERYTHING–including the upcoming Acadia. But the reality is with our 3 kids, that we must have sliding doors and ease of entry/exit. This means that only a minivan will work for us.
John also wrote:
“Well once you eliminate GM as an option, it comes down to Chrysler or Toyota/Honda/Nissan/Kia/Hyundai. Once they reject Chrysler, you’ve allowed that customer to “break the seal” and purchase Japanese cars in the future. I don’t think this is a small consideration.”
This describes our situation perfectly. We have always purchased American cars.My wife currently drives a Town and Country Limited. We have not been pleased with its lack of reliability and our dealer’s service department has been awful. So another Chrysler is not an option. Frankly, the current GM minivans just don’t compete with the best of class vans. Result: for the first time in our lives we are purchasing a Japanese car–a 2007 Toyota Sienna Limited. You have no idea how much we would prefer to be giving our $45k (ouch!) to GM.
Bruce Sherman
Oakland, Oregon
Craig
Bob,
Now is the time to open up the HHR/Pt Cruiser market. The HHR needs a turbo like the solstice with a nifty 5/6 speed manual trans. Also, if there was a RWD variant, that would be the new little ‘hot rod’ market to boot. There is no reason to give up on the minivan market. We need just ONE good Chevy van (derived from the Lambda of course). Just add sliding doors and there you have it. Most parents WANT sliding doors. How about an HHR variant with sliding doors? The variants are endless. Concentrate on ONE brand, not 4 half hearted Brand vans!!! There are winners out there, you just need some vision and moxy.
Dave
Bob,
I see GM is planning on a Chevy Lambda at Spring Hill. Good news. How about offering the Chevy CUV with a choice of either sliding or conventional doors.
Please make sure Chevy is very different from Outlook and Acadia. Visually, the Outlook and Acadia look like the same vehicle rebadged in my opinion. Please give Chevy something different like what you did for Enclave…preferably with optional sliding doors.
Great job on new Malibu!
Dave
Jeff
Bob,
Having grown up in a ‘90 Trans Sport and now owning a 02 Montana, I can say that nothing beats the usefulness of a minivan. low step in hight, decent gas mileage (I have topped 27 MPG at 70+), and the best removable seats anywhere. I have moved things that would take a suburban to make in one trip (and thats with the short wb). The sliding doors are also more useful than you might think. My wife was dead set against a minivan until she drove our friends. She was hooked. the higher driving position over our car. The ease of getting our son in and out of his car seat. When trying too move something in my father-in-laws SUV, its either load it from the back or it doesn’t go. In the van I can climb in and pull from inside, or large and bulky items can be loaded from the side. There are very few things I can carry in my S-10 that I can’t get inside the van. thats versatility. Thats what I need. I have had 3 chevy’s, 2 Saturn’s, 4 Pontiacs, and a $500 tercel for a commuter car. I really don’t want to spend more than that on anything but GM, but if i have to in order to get a nother minivan, I will. Please reconsider. And 23 MPG HWY (under the old rules) is not high enough for a family vehicle. Thanks.
Diana
Ok, so I’m not a fan of the minivan and would not mind if there were less on the road… but let’s be practical. Lots of us have two kids and a dog and grandparents that are an hour+ (in our case 20+) drive away.
How about a full-sized station wagon that is a hybrid? ‘Round town for school pick-ups with good mileage and full size for the road trips.
Bwright
Chris R,
Quite frankly GM does not need Saab. They build Swedish Buicks. Buick builds perfectly serviceable Buicks. I use the word serviceable tongue in cheek because according to the 2005 JD Power Vehicle Dependability Report which tracks vehicle dependability over a three-year period, Saab was the least reliable of all GM’s brands with a defect rate that was measurably significant relative to Buick.
I thought Saab had hit bottom then but I underestimated them. They got out a shovel and proceeded to dig. For 2006, the only thing that kept Saab from being dead last for reliability among every brand surveyed by JD Power and effectively every volume auto brand offered for sale in country was the simply shocking performance of Land Rover which has a perennial lock on last place.
Road and Track’s recent reader survey of Saab’s 9-3 provided yet more confirmation, as if any was really needed, that Saab’s reliability is not even close to where it needs to be. GM can ill afford this to continue to be factored into their comeback story.
As for building fast cars here’s a tip, truly fast cars are not FWD. They are either rear or AWD and putting a Saab grill on an AWD Subaru does not count. We are in agreement as far as the current Saab truck goes.
If Saab expects to compete they first need to get their reliability house in order. Simultaneously, they will have to clean said house of the hoary 9-5, ridiculous Saabaru and yes the rebadged GM truck. Then they need to make a commitment to standard AWD on all their cars since Saab owners are used to driving in inclement weather.
The reason I suggested a minivan for Saab is that it seems that a fairly high percentage of owners have families and buy a fair number of Saab wagons. If GM were to offer a new minivan Saab, as a European brand, would be the channel through which to sell the priciest version of the minivan. Cadillac does not have the family image to support a minivan and Buick is at the early stages of rebuilding brand equity.
Chevrolet can and should have the base version of any new GM minivan. Saturn has a loyal customer base and a slightly more up-market touch than Chevrolet and so should have the mid-level minivan. For the top level Saab should get that version.
Each vehicle should have sheetmetal differentiated as much as possible for a 2-box vehicle with clearly different interior touches. With each up-level (Saturn to Saab) there should be at least three pieces of equipment or standard trim levels not shared with the level below. For example, if the Saab version offers standard xenons then the two levels below should not even have that as an option. The most powerful engine of the three should only be offered on the Saab much as GM has done with the Escalade relative to the other GMT900’s. Finally, the Saab minivan should have a higher level of standard equipment than the two sister GM minivans below it.
This would help to realistically position the GM minivans across the price spectrum while helping to drive family showroom traffic at Saab which surely needs it.
John L.
When my wife and I last shopped for a vehicle for her, our choices came down to a Dodge Caravan or a Chevy Venture. Next time around it looks like the choices for our family will be Caravan, Odyssey, Sienna, or one of the new Korean models. For the same reasons already covered here by others, a Lambda CUV just isn’t family friendly for us.
In a total US market of roughly 16 million vehicles a year, GM wants to exit a 1 million vehicle a year segment and leave that part of the market to the competition? A few more decisions like that and GM will think of today’s 25% market share as its glorious past. Obviously the minivan segment is a mature market and is not growing by leaps and bounds like the crossover market. Nevertheless there are plenty of other smaller segments of the new vehicle market that GM can afford to exit from before the minivan market. Surely staying in a major bread-and-butter market segment like this is a far easier business decision than the case for entering niche low-volume markets like the SSR, GTO, XLR, or Sky/Solstice.
Build the Lambda minivan as a Chevy, and build it better than what Toyota and Honda build today. GM will not only make a hefty boatload of cash and gain market share over the current CSV offerings, but will also keep 100,000+ customers and their dollars away from the competition.
Jeff B
I agree with Bob. There might be a small market out there for minivans, but it’s not worth the money GM would have to spend to produce a really great one. Let Toyota and Honda be stuck with the stigma. It hurts all their other models to have the company badge on these boring appliances. Now when people think GM they’ll think Corvettes, Auras, Sostices, Enclaves and Escalades. Make a cool full-size wagon if you want to get families back.
Bill Madro
When GM first thought about the minivan, they should have copied the original Chrysler magic wagons. Even 20 years later, the original design is still very clever and spacious. Ever try to work on one of those dustbuster vans? What a joke.
Duncan1800
Mr. Lutz,
After reading previous comments by JWilly about the fabled “Guy Minivan Owner”, I present the following scenario from real life.
My father, currently working in the business world, is planning to retire soon and make his hobby - painting - a primary career.
Consequently, he’s been looking for something to replace his current commuter car (a Suzuki Swift) that has big cargo space for painting gear, but that’s also lightweight and nimble enough to be frugal with fuel.
The only vehicle he’s yet come up with that matches both these criteria is the erstwhile Honda Element - an impressively designed car/truck hybrid that has been best described as a “motorized all-weather gear tote” by one source. And with features like folding/removable seats, hose-out floors, automatic all-wheel-drive, and a short enough wheelbase for mild off-road excursions into prime camping territory - not to mention nice flat bodysides for quick application of advertising - it’s really the only vehicle in its class.
Now, my dad’s never been that concerned with stoplight drag races, so huge horsepower isn’t really important to him. But I suspect that something closer to 200 horses (instead of the Honda’s just-adequate 166) might make a confirmed sale even stronger.
Now, you might think this is irrelevant since the man’s already made up his mind. Here’s where it gets interesting. He also likes the style of vehicles like the Chevy HHR or (its obvious inspiration) the Chrysler PT Cruiser, but has often wondered aloud, “Why don’t they make a panel version of that?”
My modest proposal? Build a compact-sized “gear-tote” with a 2.4 DOHC EcoTec as a base engine, and maybe the 3.2 DOHC V6 as an option. Build both with a raised stance and all-wheel-drive, maybe give it hidden sliding doors (that o