OT with no brands left to destroy GM decides to scuttle itself

[Junkman]

It doesn't matter what they call it. The car is so woefully nondescript that it won't make any difference if they'd call it Eusebia or Brunhilde. Actually, the latter would add some panache, relatively speaking.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Junkman

[Hippie]

I agree with you all that the name doesn't fit in my opinion all the auto makers not just GM need to stop looking at the past. They all need to actuality hire someone to come up with new names/ as well as the new designs they are all ready working on.

If we keep going this direction ford gonna end up remaking the Model T with a electric engine.

[coreyh29645]

would we be complaining if gm said "and our concept 2014 chevrolet uterus"? i know i would have just left it alone in the hopes that it looked better at the time of production. chevelle it ain't and i say that not being a chevelle fan. i do like the thought of the reutrn of the z24 badge. i can almost like this as a z24.

[Fabrux]

Y'know, there's a reason modern cars tend to look a lot alike: aerodynamic efficiency.

[Chuck Most]

It doesn't matter what they call it. The car is so woefully nondescript that it won't make any difference if they'd call it Eusebia or Brunhilde. Actually, the latter would add some panache, relatively speaking.

The way things are going, there might be an actual 'Chevrolet Nondescript' in the lineup by 2015 or so. All the good model names were spoken for decades ago.

[Junkman]

I agree with you all that the name doesn't fit in my opinion all the auto makers not just GM need to stop looking at the past. They all need to actuality hire someone to come up with new names/ as well as the new designs they are all ready working on.

If we keep going this direction ford gonna end up remaking the Model T with a electric engine.

Agree 100%

When GM, or rather, the entire American car industry, was the envy of the world, it did the opposite of looking at the past.

All this retro-nonsense has badly backfired so far, yet the car industry as a whole stubbornly refuses to abandon the concept.

Looking at the car in question, it is clearly targeted at an age group that is too young to know what a Chevelle really was or what bell the name rings with their parents.

A youthful small coupe with an economical 4 cylinder engine and a low price tag sure has a market, like the original Z-cars or Ford Capris had in the Seventies. Paint it sebring yellow with a matt black bonnet and I could see my daughter in it. Add a turbocharged V6 version for the boys and there you go. But for heaven's sake, don't call it Chevelle or Master Deluxe. Call it something the young people will relate to. Call it Factor X or Cancun.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Junkman

[Junkman]

Y'know, there's a reason modern cars tend to look a lot alike: aerodynamic efficiency.

Yep, that's the generic excuse of an industry running out of ideas. As if aerodynamic efficiency was of primary importance when cars spend 90% of their life below 50 mph. Furthermore, what looks aerodynamic usually isn't.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Junkman

[sjordan2]

The name game has more to do with whatever marketing strategy they're looking at than failure to come up with names. Evidently, internal corporate nostalgia is at the forefront these days. As an ad agency creative professional, I have spent eons of time coming up with names for everything from potato chips to Sea Ray, Boston Whaler and other boat models, and I can assure you that the automobile manufacturers have thousands of unused names in their inventories that they and other types of companies have trademarked (I know, because, especially for boat names, my trademark application research hit many dead ends thanks to unused names that were already spoken for).

[Guest]

Sometimes bringing an old name back doesn't help sales. Remember when Ford replaced the Taurus with the 500? It sounded pretty good at the time,but it didn't take long for Ford to realize that the public just wasn't buying it. The GTO didn't last very long either. Anyone remember the little tiny Nova? The Chevelle was an icon in the sixties and early seventies. It's best remembered the way it was instead of defacing the name now. Besides,they already have the Malibu. I would rather see a two door version of it called a Chevelle. Times change and so do the cars. The days of big blocks and chrome galore are over.

[Junkman]

The name game has more to do with whatever marketing strategy they're looking at than failure to come up with names. Evidently, internal corporate nostalgia is at the forefront these days. As an ad agency creative professional, I have spent eons of time coming up with names for everything from potato chips to Sea Ray, Boston Whaler and other boat models, and I can assure you that the automobile manufacturers have thousands of unused names in their inventories that they and other types of companies have trademarked (I know, because, especially for boat names, my trademark application research hit many dead ends thanks to unused names that were already spoken for).

Interestingly, many of the more successful car makers today don't use model names at all.

[Modelmartin]

How about Corvair?

[sjordan2]

Sometimes bringing an old name back doesn't help sales. Remember when Ford replaced the Taurus with the 500? It sounded pretty good at the time,but it didn't take long for Ford to realize that the public just wasn't buying it. The GTO didn't last very long either. Anyone remember the little tiny Nova? The Chevelle was an icon in the sixties and early seventies. It's best remembered the way it was instead of defacing the name now. Besides,they already have the Malibu. I would rather see a two door version of it called a Chevelle. Times change and so do the cars. The days of big blocks and chrome galore are over.

I agree. None of the recent cars using such names - especially the Dodge Charger - bears much resemblance in spirit or legacy to their namesakes.

[Junkman]

How about Corvair?

Ralph will have a fit.

[Chuck Most]

Sometimes bringing an old name back doesn't help sales. Remember when Ford replaced the Taurus with the 500? It sounded pretty good at the time,but it didn't take long for Ford to realize that the public just wasn't buying it. The GTO didn't last very long either. Anyone remember the little tiny Nova? The Chevelle was an icon in the sixties and early seventies. It's best remembered the way it was instead of defacing the name now. Besides,they already have the Malibu. I would rather see a two door version of it called a Chevelle. Times change and so do the cars. The days of big blocks and chrome galore are over.

Here's the thing though- of course everyone remembers the SS and big-block powered Chevelles, but the majority of them were just six-cylinder, four-door, mom-and-pop transportation modules. Same as this concept in the regard there was nothing really exceptional about them for their time. At its core, the Chevelle was simply a mid-size family car. I don't see how using the name on a modern car would dilute the name in any way. A lot of guys weren't happy when the Impala and Malibu names were put on front wheel drive 'family' sedans, but that did not seem to hinder the sucess of those cars, and nobody thinks any less of the 'old' Impalas and Malibus as a result.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Chuck Most

[sjordan2]

Interestingly, many of the more successful car makers today don't use model names at all.

Works for me if the Mother brand has a strong enough image. For example, the only sub-brand "name" I can remember for BMW is the Bavaria, with everything else being numbers and letters since the beginning. Series numbers seem to work quite well for many manufacturers, such as the BMW 3, 5 and 6 series cars.

But the subject is American cars, with a long history of names that evoke certain images in consumers' minds, and giant brands like Chevrolet that require a bit more differentiation.

[Chuck Most]

American manufacturers haven't gotten the swing of alphabetic or alphanumeric naming, to be honest. With Caddilac you have the CTS, STS, and DTS, and they all bear a strong resemblance to one another. When I was in the auto repair business, customers and mechanics alike were constantly confusing them. Lincoln's new nomenclature isn't much better.

[Junkman]

Works for me if the Mother brand has a strong enough image. For example, the only sub-brand "name" I can remember for BMW is the Bavaria, with everything else being numbers and letters since the beginning. Series numbers seem to work quite well for many manufacturers, such as the BMW 3, 5 and 6 series cars.

But the subject is American cars, with a long history of names that evoke certain images in consumers' minds, and giant brands like Chevrolet that require a bit more differentiation.

"Bavaria" was for America only. Everywhere else they were called 2500, 2800, 3.0 and 3.3 depending on engine displacement.

As for the subject of American cars - it is exactly that stubborn clinging to what is in essence a pseudo history without much human value that requires rethinking, or at least this is what some people in here expressed. Nostalgia or clinging to history one can afford if one -well- can afford it. The American car industry however needs drastic measures if it wants to successfully continue without being bailed out by the taxpayer on a regular basis.

[Peter Lombardo]

I don't mean to break up the "resurrection name" party, but go back and look at that picture again. It does not indicate where it came from. It doesn't indicate whether it is an official GM picture or design. That picture indicates nothing. In the old days I used to say, "I believe half of what I see and none of what I hear".....with the internet, computer drawing programs and the inherent deviousness of many today, I believe nothing, and I mean nothing that I see or hear, especially on the internet.

Before I believe that that design is being considered for production, especially with the time honored name of Chevelle, I need to see far more proof. Until then, it is just more internet psycho-babble.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Peter Lombardo

[Guest]

If it is a production design, it's a travesty to the name.

[Hypermung]

im hoping the caprice makes it to the civilian market.

... Just on a side note, Australia got the Caprice last year

[Lownslow]

... Just on a side note, Australia got the Caprice last year

i know, we get hosed when it comes to the good stuff

[Jon Cole]

says chevelle on the fenders but the car itself is no bigger than a cruze

That??? That... looks so generic, that I doubt its authenticity. Overall lack of detail, blacked out interior... meh. Biggest concern is could it be an indication of size? Hope it's not as scrawny as it appears.

[Lownslow]

GM confirmed it

http://jalopnik.com/5873508/gm-confirms-mystery-detroit-auto-show-concept-a-chevy

[Hypermung]

i know, we get hosed when it comes to the good stuff

....... Just thought I'd tease you Frank with a shot of the leather interior

[Lownslow]

....... Just thought I'd tease you Frank with a shot of the leather interior

want so bad