Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Would someone please explain to me why GMC, Chevrolet, and Buick want to have similar models? This question came to the forefront of my thoughts when I read the article today in the Wall Street Journal about GM canceling the Buick crossover they planned.
Would someone please explain to me why GMC, Chevrolet, and Buick want to have similar models? This question came to the forefront of my thoughts when I read the article today in the Wall Street Journal about GM canceling the Buick crossover they planned.
GMC trucks are supposed to be a little nicer than Chevy trucks, and the Buick's are nicer than the other models.
Would someone please explain to me why GMC, Chevrolet, and Buick want to have similar models? This question came to the forefront of my thoughts when I read the article today in the Wall Street Journal about GM canceling the Buick crossover they planned.
Since GM, Chevrolet and Buick aren't separate companies the only one doing the deciding is GM. The reason for rebadging is to maintain brand loyalty while eliminating the cost of developing different models for each of the subsidiary brands.
A nice wiki article on the various takes on rebadging.
All of the motor vehicle companies do this. GM has the same cars with Chevrolet, Buick, Pontiac and Oldsmobile (I know it no longer exists but they still have cars on the road). Cadillac and Saturn are really the only two that are not based on the same models as the others. Cadillac has had its own engines not used by the other companies as well; such as the Northstar. Cadillac did have an extremely overpriced version of the Cavalier in the eighties which was a complete disaster. Cadillac is also the maker of the Escalade which is basically just a really overpriced Yukon, Tahoe or Suburban. Chevrolet is always the lowest form of the cars offered by each. Buick and Oldsmobiles were always a step up and more of a luxury version and Pontiac was always supposed to be a little more "sporty". GMC is basically a luxury version of Chevrolet trucks.
Ford does the same thing with the Mercury and Lincoln brands with Mercury being a step up from the Ford version and Lincoln a step up from the Mercury.
Chrysler is the step up from Dodge vehicles as far as luxury goes.
Acura is a more luxurious Honda and Lexus a more luxurious Toyota.
Why they all do this is beyond me. I would think it would be cheaper and more cost effective to offer the differences with the same single company name but adding more available trim options.
Yes, but it can be done in a clever way without diluting the brands, e.g. Volkswagen Group in Europe
Skoda - Budget brand, Conservative practicality
Volkswagen - Middle class brand, unspectacular modernity
Bentley - Prestige brand
Seat - Budget, young emotional
Audi - Upper class, sporty, luxury
Lamborghini - Super sport
I could even add Porsche in brackets. The Cayenne is practically based on a VW Touareg. But all those cars look different inside and out. And from the looks nobody would notice that the Seat Leon has the same basis as the VW Golf or Audi A3.
And VW Group brands maintain the image of best quality for an adequate price (don't start grumping, it is like this over here... ).
So the modular way to build vehicles can be cost effective, whilst adding diversity in the model lineup.
Yes, but it can be done in a clever way without diluting the brands, e.g. Volkswagen Group in Europe
Skoda - Budget brand, Conservative practicality
Volkswagen - Middle class brand, unspectacular modernity
Bentley - Prestige brand
Seat - Budget, young emotional
Audi - Upper class, sporty, luxury
Lamborghini - Super sport
I could even add Porsche in brackets. The Cayenne is practically based on a VW Touareg. But all those cars look different inside and out. And from the looks nobody would notice that the Seat Leon has the same basis as the VW Golf or Audi A3.
And VW Group brands maintain the image of best quality for an adequate price (don't start grumping, it is like this over here... ).
So the modular way to build vehicles can be cost effective, whilst adding diversity in the model lineup.
Yes, the Cayenne is basically the same as the VW which in my opinion makes it an overpriced version. To me it does resemble the VW as well. As far as the Bentley and Lamborghini go they are not built on the same chassis as anything else. To my knowledge they are really stand alone companies regardless of whom they are owned by. To me there are some Audi vehicles that resemble the Passat. I really do not know enough about Audi, Skoda or Seat to comment very much on them though.
The thread is really talking about cars using the same platform and often times even engines such as was the case with the older Camaros and Firebirds, Ponitac Aztec and Buick Rendezvous, Grand Prix and Monte Carlo and Regal and Cutlass, etc. These use not only the same basic platforms such as the Cayenne and the VW version, but they also use the same engines, transmissions, suspensions. The only differences are in slight cosmetics and then interior and exterior trim.
They did the same thing when I worked in a Minute Maid juice factory. They just changed the carton in machine for orange juice as juice was still flowing and added 1 bag of pulp to 5000 gallons of regular and called it country style with pulp and charged more.
Sometimes they ran out of cartons and just put different kind in and juice stayed the same. Cost more though.
As far as the Bentley and Lamborghini go they are not built on the same chassis as anything else.
The Bentley Continental GT is based on the same platform as the VW Phaeton... which is not a bad thing though, the Phaeton is one of the most underrated vehicles of its time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egobop
The thread is really talking about cars using the same platform and often times even engines such as was the case with the older Camaros and Firebirds, Ponitac Aztec and Buick Rendezvous, Grand Prix and Monte Carlo and Regal and Cutlass, etc. These use not only the same basic platforms such as the Cayenne and the VW version, but they also use the same engines, transmissions, suspensions. The only differences are in slight cosmetics and then interior and exterior trim.
Understood. I personally think its a joke, when only the badge and some cosmetics make the difference. Sharing modules, platforms, parts should be done in a way that maintains strong individual brands... that is why I started with the VW Group. They do it right IMO.
The Bentley Continental GT is based on the same platform as the VW Phaeton... which is not a bad thing though, the Phaeton is one of the most underrated vehicles of its time.
Wow. I actually looked this up and I stand corrected. I never thought they would build a Bentley or Lamborghini on the same frame as any other car since they are supposed to be so exclusive. I have also found while looking this up that the Audi A8 can be had with the same transmission and engine as the Bentley and VW. I looked up the price of the Bentley so basically for $180,000 some rich freak can own a VW with different badging and trim. From what I have read only the base engine in the Bentley can be had in the VW or the Audi. Once you step up in the engine from the base it is to be had in the Bentley only.
I have also read that the new Jaguars owned by Ford share platforms with Ford vehicles as well. I have read that the Jaguar has at least kept the electrical problems they have been known for throughout the years though so at least Ford kept something authentic with it.
Would someone please explain to me why GMC, Chevrolet, and Buick want to have similar models? This question came to the forefront of my thoughts when I read the article today in the Wall Street Journal about GM canceling the Buick crossover they planned.
Its a holdover from when GM had a 50% share of the US market. Back then they made a car for "every purse and purpose" and the brands had more distinct images and reasons to be.
Once they started losing share they did'nt eliminate brands. There was bureaucratic momentum from inside the company to keep the brands alive. Plus GM would have to buy out/payoff a brands dealers to shut it down. (GM did it w/ Oldsmobile in the late 90's-early 2000's and it cost them several Billion dollars to shutter the brand)
So to make it all work they decided to "badge egineer" common platforms and models so they could spread costs across a larger volumes. As they did the badge engineering, it further diluted the indivdual brands which lead to more share loss and on and on into the downward spiral that culminated in their bankruptcy this year.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
). 
