Crazy_Schizo

From http://www.cnn.com/2007/AUTOS/05/25/...mry/index.html
Cliff notes: GM dealers will have Camry and Accord models for shoppers to compare on premises to the equivalent GM vehicles.

Does anyone else see this backfiring for GM?

QUIKAG

It won't hurt because the dealer can allow them to drive competitor's models and then try to cut them a deal on a new Saturn or Chevy Malibu.

Most people want to drive the competition before making a decision, so if they can drive the competition at one dealership, then that dealership has a better chance of making a sale because they won't leave their lot to drive the competition.

Penforhire

It'll backfire only if GM is wrong about how their vehicles compare. Darn clever otherwise.

JonBoy

Problem is, if the Chevy (or Saturn) sucks (in comparison), they're going to lose sales faster than they can say "We're broke!"

If they build the next Malibu as well as they built the most recent full-size pickups (and SUVs), they'll do okay. They won't take over the market or anything but they'll at least do okay. On paper, the car looks great inside and out, with a decent powertrain to boot.

However, build it like the last Grand Prix I sat in and the buyers will be RUNNING to the Toyota or Honda dealership as fast as you can say "What cheap plastic?"

I haven't sat in a Chevy car (yet) that I'd take over its Honda competitor based on fit and finish, feel, or general ambience. I don't think Chevy's going to catch up this time (or even next), but if they're pretty close AND cheaper, they might do okay on this.

Really, though, I think they'll get the uneducated buyer. They'll say "That Honda costs $24K and this Chevy can be had for $21K", when in fact the Honda can be had for $22.5K at just about any dealership in the country (and it'll easily make up that cost difference by losing less value in the first year). Chances are they'll also compare an Accord LX to a more heavily optioned Chevy SS or GXP model or something.

We'll see, though. I'll be interested to see how they spin it and what actual cars (from Toyota and Honda) are compared to each of the GM models. Will they be of comparable cost with comparable options and comparable size or will they do a mismatch in hopes of catching people unawares?

sam_spider

It'll only work for GM if the are using 4 banger Camry's and Accords, stripped down. But, the Aura really is a good looking car.

bjohnston

This is an excellent point.

I think it's a great idea on GM's part. The Aura is a FAR more attractive car on the road than the Accord or Camry (haven't driven the Aura or Camry, but I don't care for the Accord). I'm not in the market for such a car, but I'd like to drive the Aura nonetheless just to see how far GM has come. I'm always impressed when I drive by one.

sahtt

Dealers in the Houston area are now advertising how GM products are just as good at Toyota's as well, but cheaper and with a better warranty. It seems to be a direct correlation with GM losing the #1 spot to Toyota.

First, getting the potential customer to your dealership is at least 50% of the battle. If your salesmen are there to knock on accord/camry qualities while pumping up a cobalt/malibu, it's to their advantage. Plus they will literally have to tell the salesman, "NO I DON'T WANT THE CAR!" You have no other excuse like "I want to check out X dealer and test drive X model car". In sales we call this answering the question before it's asked and it can create huge leverage.

However, there is one common theme to this; avoidance of the real issue.

No one typically rants they bought an accord because it looked so much better, or had so much more power, options, etc. People buy accords and camrys because the are PROVEN to be durable, reliable, and hold their value over the LONG haul. The average person doesn't just dispose of their daily driver after 5 years [ignore the 100k mile warranty part, it's more or less a scam unless you drive 20k miles every single year].

Now hyundai's 100k mile 10 year warranty is different and has a lot more power. Bottom line.. GM and Ford a like are just doing their best and once again seemingly ignoring why their sales lag.. quality.

rockville

Johnboy,

I actually disagree about the materials used in the Grand Prix. Having compared rental current Camrys to the current Grand Prix I feel when it comes to solid construction and quality of materials GM is the winner.

HOWEVER!

The Grand Prix styling is the pits. Even if the doors are covered with materials that's somewhat better than the Toyota and feels quite a bit more solid (a failing of the new Camry IMHO) the Toyota interior isn't ugly. It certainly isn't good and pails next to what Honda has had out for several years but it is much better than the styling (and I emphasize styling) of the Grand Prix.
I've never liked the restyled GP. I liked the looks of the old car but the interior was low buck. I thought the current car abandoned the good styling of the previous car and never gave it a second look until a rental GP was used at my office. I was very impressed with the quality, fit, finish and solidity of the interior. The styling kills it for me. A pity because the other items are the ones that generally cost real money to get right.

I think GM

JonBoy

I spent three weeks in a Grand Prix. Liked the power but that was about it. HARD plastics everywhere. No creaks or rubbing or anything (ie, solidly built) but horrible to the touch. Very cheap. The Camry is much better to me (and I don't even like the new Camry interior).

Bottom line: the Grand Prix seemed will BUILT but it felt like crap. The Camry seems just as well built (perhaps not quite as solid feeling, but that's because it doesn't feel "hard" either) and it's a lot more refreshing to be in.

rockville

The GP I was in (now several rentals) have soft dash and door materials. The center stack is hard plastic but I figure that is common on most cars. I was actually surprised how much was soft and how much was good to the touch (but hard on the eyes).