Retro a no go when it comes to car design, sort of
06-28-2005, 03:02 PM
#1
Wannabe yuppie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 25,918
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Retro a no go when it comes to car design, sort of
Retro as a design theme has failed. There are two success stories, but four failures. Take a look:
Ford's Thunderbird, clearly a failure.
Volkswagen's New Beetle, sinking every year.
Chevrolet's SSR, never reached sales targets.
Chrysler's PT Cruiser, not really a failure but far from the success it should be.
On the success side, we have the MINI. Of course, that Mustang is running strong, although it is new so we don't know how long she will prance. And there's a new one, the Chevy HHR, which looks like it might have arrived late to the party.
It's also possible to take a bit of the past without going retro: The Chrysler 300 is like that. There's something about it that points back, but it's not retro.
But in each failure, each one, I would say, the failure is due to managerial incompetence or mishandling the market. Maybe they would have failed anyway, but incompetence did them in.
Let's start with the Thunderbird, with only 5719 sales in five months and the end of production has been announced. Nothing at Ford was more exciting than the new 'Bird when it came out in 2001, and nothing was more mishandled.
It came out a year late. The Bird was overpriced to start - low $40,000s - and the dealers made a practice of ripping the customer off, $50,000, $60,000. The interior was nothing special either, and there were some quality problems: the optional detachable top scratched the body sides. What more do you need to ruin a car? Imagine if it had come in at $30,000, on time, with some discipline exerted on the dealers.
There is another even more horrible thought: Maybe Robert McNamara, who killed the original two-seat Bird, was right all the time and four seats are better than two.
Next, the Volkswagen New Beetle. VW was dead in the U.S. until the New Beetle brought the company back in 1998. But it is fading, only 14,271 sales in five months this year.
What happened? The worst quality reputation in the business. Is there anyone who doesn't know a New Beetle owner that had troubles?
They have a good variety of engines and a second model, the convertible. But the quality reputation has been too much.
Two other problems have haunted VW since the New Beetle arrived. The market was turning to SUVs when VW was in the doldrums. The New Beetle, on a Golf platform, was the perfect foundation for a low-priced SUV to compete with the Toyota RAV4 and Honda CR-V. VW had an all-wheel-drive system that fit the platform (you can find it on an Audi TT), and a wonderful and distinctive retro-SUV design theme from the long-gone Thing, if you remember it. But VW never built a New Thing.
Second, the New Beetle is a two-door only. Why not offer a four-door New Beetle, one a bit longer and roomier and easier to get into? Sounds good to me but it never happened.
How about the Chevy SSR? This was to be a limited-volume vehicle but it's just too limited at 4221 sales after five months. Again, excitement was great when it come out, but then the car magazines turned against it. Too much shake, too little power for the Corvette crowd, and again, a high price: mid-$40,000s with dealers again ripping off early intenders for $50,000 and $60,000.
I think it might have been better to rethink the concept, use that retro design for a small two-seat pickup (after all, they are vanishing from the market) but shooting for higher volume with a much lower price with no convertible top, just a bang around small truck. Maybe that would have flopped, too.
Two vehicles have done reasonably well with retro. Chrysler's PT Cruiser has logged 53,851 sales in five months; it's actually the second best-selling car in the Chrysler Group lineup. But the volume has never grown up to its potential and is trending down. The PT design was retro, but it is not a throwback to a particular model and this was as major strength. And it was as well done, good-looking, roomy, and useful.
So why didn't it grow? After all, they did add a convertible. A few reasons, really. First, they killed the division, Plymouth, that the PT was targeted for, so it was an orphan from day one. Next, they didn't broaden the line: no all-wheel-drive version, no two-door snazzy California Cruizer, no panel truck. All were possible. Had the Plymouth division not been killed, they would have been built and the PT would be a major player today.
Briefly, let's consider the MINI, a success with volume still growing - but it is small volume, at 18,000 in five months, probably 40,000 for the year.
What makes it a success? First, the numbers. They may be small in the U.S. but it's 150,000-plus worldwide, so the plant in Britain runs full time. They expanded the line with the S version and then the convertible and we know a wagon is in the works. Sales goals are modest and the dealer group is good.
And maybe the most successful of all, the Mustang. Of course the Mustang is a success, but the Mustang isn't retro. It's like the Porsche 911. The design is permanent. Slight changes may be made, but a Porsche is always a Porsche and to be a success a Mustang should just be a Mustang.
Now we have the Chevy HHR, a small SUV just put into production. Like the PT Cruiser, the design is retro. It's in a growing market, small SUVs, that's good. I predict success, particularly if Chevy can spin off some variations. What variations? How about putting a pickup box on the back, a la the Honda Ridgeline. How about an SS model?
Retro has not been a success. But if it's well done, if there's more than merely one model but a line, and if the price is right, I think retro can succeed. We just haven't seen much of it.
http://www.thecarconnection.com/Indu...192.A8819.html
Ford's Thunderbird, clearly a failure.
Volkswagen's New Beetle, sinking every year.
Chevrolet's SSR, never reached sales targets.
Chrysler's PT Cruiser, not really a failure but far from the success it should be.
On the success side, we have the MINI. Of course, that Mustang is running strong, although it is new so we don't know how long she will prance. And there's a new one, the Chevy HHR, which looks like it might have arrived late to the party.
It's also possible to take a bit of the past without going retro: The Chrysler 300 is like that. There's something about it that points back, but it's not retro.
But in each failure, each one, I would say, the failure is due to managerial incompetence or mishandling the market. Maybe they would have failed anyway, but incompetence did them in.
Let's start with the Thunderbird, with only 5719 sales in five months and the end of production has been announced. Nothing at Ford was more exciting than the new 'Bird when it came out in 2001, and nothing was more mishandled.
It came out a year late. The Bird was overpriced to start - low $40,000s - and the dealers made a practice of ripping the customer off, $50,000, $60,000. The interior was nothing special either, and there were some quality problems: the optional detachable top scratched the body sides. What more do you need to ruin a car? Imagine if it had come in at $30,000, on time, with some discipline exerted on the dealers.
There is another even more horrible thought: Maybe Robert McNamara, who killed the original two-seat Bird, was right all the time and four seats are better than two.
Next, the Volkswagen New Beetle. VW was dead in the U.S. until the New Beetle brought the company back in 1998. But it is fading, only 14,271 sales in five months this year.
What happened? The worst quality reputation in the business. Is there anyone who doesn't know a New Beetle owner that had troubles?
They have a good variety of engines and a second model, the convertible. But the quality reputation has been too much.
Two other problems have haunted VW since the New Beetle arrived. The market was turning to SUVs when VW was in the doldrums. The New Beetle, on a Golf platform, was the perfect foundation for a low-priced SUV to compete with the Toyota RAV4 and Honda CR-V. VW had an all-wheel-drive system that fit the platform (you can find it on an Audi TT), and a wonderful and distinctive retro-SUV design theme from the long-gone Thing, if you remember it. But VW never built a New Thing.
Second, the New Beetle is a two-door only. Why not offer a four-door New Beetle, one a bit longer and roomier and easier to get into? Sounds good to me but it never happened.
How about the Chevy SSR? This was to be a limited-volume vehicle but it's just too limited at 4221 sales after five months. Again, excitement was great when it come out, but then the car magazines turned against it. Too much shake, too little power for the Corvette crowd, and again, a high price: mid-$40,000s with dealers again ripping off early intenders for $50,000 and $60,000.
I think it might have been better to rethink the concept, use that retro design for a small two-seat pickup (after all, they are vanishing from the market) but shooting for higher volume with a much lower price with no convertible top, just a bang around small truck. Maybe that would have flopped, too.
Two vehicles have done reasonably well with retro. Chrysler's PT Cruiser has logged 53,851 sales in five months; it's actually the second best-selling car in the Chrysler Group lineup. But the volume has never grown up to its potential and is trending down. The PT design was retro, but it is not a throwback to a particular model and this was as major strength. And it was as well done, good-looking, roomy, and useful.
So why didn't it grow? After all, they did add a convertible. A few reasons, really. First, they killed the division, Plymouth, that the PT was targeted for, so it was an orphan from day one. Next, they didn't broaden the line: no all-wheel-drive version, no two-door snazzy California Cruizer, no panel truck. All were possible. Had the Plymouth division not been killed, they would have been built and the PT would be a major player today.
Briefly, let's consider the MINI, a success with volume still growing - but it is small volume, at 18,000 in five months, probably 40,000 for the year.
What makes it a success? First, the numbers. They may be small in the U.S. but it's 150,000-plus worldwide, so the plant in Britain runs full time. They expanded the line with the S version and then the convertible and we know a wagon is in the works. Sales goals are modest and the dealer group is good.
And maybe the most successful of all, the Mustang. Of course the Mustang is a success, but the Mustang isn't retro. It's like the Porsche 911. The design is permanent. Slight changes may be made, but a Porsche is always a Porsche and to be a success a Mustang should just be a Mustang.
Now we have the Chevy HHR, a small SUV just put into production. Like the PT Cruiser, the design is retro. It's in a growing market, small SUVs, that's good. I predict success, particularly if Chevy can spin off some variations. What variations? How about putting a pickup box on the back, a la the Honda Ridgeline. How about an SS model?
Retro has not been a success. But if it's well done, if there's more than merely one model but a line, and if the price is right, I think retro can succeed. We just haven't seen much of it.
http://www.thecarconnection.com/Indu...192.A8819.html
h:
