Those of us old enough to remember the Kennedy/Nixon debate remember Dinah Shore encouraging us to "See the USA in your Chevrolet." Then Chevy invited us to enjoy "baseball, hot dogs, apple pie and Chevrolet" driving "the Heartbeat of America" as we participated in "an American Revolution." So much for flag-waving. In yesterday's press release, Chevy crows that their new Cruze– the Daewoo Optra they're going to build in Lordstown OH— features a new "global design language" that was "developed by a global design and engineering team." They warn tell us this "new global design language… will continue to be a signature element for future vehicles carrying the gold bowtie." Let's hope they're not talking about the new schnoz they're sticking on the front of the 2009 Aveo5. Where are Bill Mitchell or Harley Earl when you need them? Oh that's right; they're dead. Never mind then.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
The current design language isn’t exactly original or even very attractive so maybe the global design will be an improvement?
That grille should have never made to Chevy cars. It was borderline ugly on the last-gen Silverado/Avalanche, and yet they still pushed it forward across the brand.
Globalization leads to fewer, not more, choicese.
Sameness permiates every product sold.
Take the badges off of most mainstream vehicles, and there is little to tell who, or where, it was built.
Cars are kind of lame anymore.
It is so depressing to get Daewoos, when Western Europeans and South Americans get Opels. How about the CORSA and the ASTRA, rather than the Aveo and Optra. The Astra should be hatchback for Saturn, and sedan for Chevy.
I’m more of a free-trader, but at a time where the U.S. is at its most protectionist, accenting the “global” aspect of a car does not seem like a very smart idea…
I’m really starting to resent the “Congratulations, You’re About To Be Run Down By a Chevy/Honda/Audi/Benz” grille fashion.
It’s borne out of the “Make the Logo Bigger” school of marketing and design. It’s also one of the reasons I’ve always respected brands like Kia and (before the current 9-3) Saab. The branding was low key; the product did the talking. Conversely, the new C-Class is especially obnoxious; could they make the logo any bigger?
It is so depressing to get Daewoos, when Western Europeans and South Americans get Opels. How about the CORSA and the ASTRA, rather than the Aveo and Optra. The Astra should be hatchback for Saturn, and sedan for Chevy.
Don’t worry, Europe is about to get these, too. After all, if GM can’t screw up Opel directly, they’ll just squeeze them with Chevy-badged Daewoos.
Why? I have no idea. The Opel-Vauxhall/Saab split works well enough, so why does GM have to push Opel upmarket, kill Saab between Opel and Cadillac, and hamstring Opel with Chevy? Did they learn nothing from the brand-management clusterf__k that is their North American market?
The Corvette and upcoming Camaro are proper-looking Chevrolets. Go to a car show and look at the Chevrolets people covet.
When GM adopts styling that looks distinctly American and Chevrolet that will be one small step in reinvigorating the brand.
Making Chevrolets all look like Daewoos is just another step in destroying the brand.
Did they put the bow-tie on the wrong place? What is the deal with designing everything to look like Pikachu, or insects? This thing is unpleasant, and I won’t be buying.
Speaking of unpleasant: I just saw my first ‘new’ Malibu yesterday in Dallas traffic. I had hoped to like it based on promo photos – I hated it. The rear end looks like a poorly constructed Revell model with the boat-trailer replacement style lights not meshing well, at all; and the sides look truck-like tall. I was amazed, as I had figured it was going to kill the new Accord in looks; it didn’t, which is saying something.
Take the badges off of most mainstream vehicles, and there is little to tell who, or where, it was built.
Cars are kind of lame anymore.
I recently took a trip and rented a car while there….when I came out of the hotel, I said, “my God the cars all look the same!” I had to hunt for the Ford logo to find mine. Really lame.
John
How Audi like or Audi lite.
I think you’ll find Europeans are getting plenty of “Daewoos” badged as Chevrolet. Check out the Chevrolet Deutschland website (www.chevrolet.de) and review “Unsere Modelle:” (our models).
The UK site (www.chevrolet.co.uk) is essentially the same.
Across Europe, Chevrolet is positioned at the bottom of the barrel, presumably so as not to tarnish the Opel and Vauxhall brands.
Better get used to it. If Chevrolet has a future, this is what it looks like.
GMNA eithers gets with the program or disappears. Building products that are “distinctly American” is why they are in such deep shit. The vast majority of the world neither needs nor wants “distinctly American”.
As in the Galapagos Islands, these evolutionary freaks can only survive in a highly specialized habitat. Introduce them into the real world and they die out.
Heck I’m American and I don’t want many of the vehicles that are distinctly American…
I disagree, nudave, regarding distinctly American cars. Distinctly American is what has works for GM. Vette, Tahoe/Suburban, Cadillacs, etc. Your Galapagos comment is a decent analogy, as Europeans don’t want big American cars. But in the Mideast, Russia, and Australia; big cars are popular. And remember, the US is still the world’s largest single auto market, and Chevy can live here alone, successfully…especially if Pontiac & GMC die out.
One only needs to look at the success of the Chrysler 300 to know that a distinctly American car can be a success–not only in the US, but worldwide.
Daewoo should not be designing cars for Chevy–that is damaging the brand. If I want Korean, then I’ll buy a Hyundai.
I’m sure Harley Earl is rolling over in his grave at just the mention of “Design Language” and the stuff being passed off today. Not just GM, but everyone. Where has real design disappeared to??? And don’t mention BMW either — that just makes my rear end hurt.
Keep in mind I’m not advocating giant cars when I say distinctly American or Chevrolet.
I’m advocating stand-out styling with heritage cues from classic Chevrolets blended into something that would look like a 21st century Chevrolet. Everything from the little Aveo to the big Tahoe should look distinctive and befitting of the brand and it’s rich history.
Most Chevrolets look dire. You could peel the badge off and not know what it really is. Even the new Malibu looks uncomfortably Japanese, not like a real Chevy.
That’s the new Chevy global design? The brand that gave us the Corvair (both gens), the ’55, ’58, 63, and ’64 Chevies, the ’90s Caprice? Lady Bird Johnson (who for those who don’t remember, took to beautifying the highways when LBJ was pres) would have fits.
That front end actually makes Subaru’s old “Flying Vage” look good.
On a side note, there are some good Korean cars. Why does Chevy choose ones that hearken back to crap cars from the 80’s to inflict on us?
I agree most cars are already kinda generic looking – but as long as I can remember, Chevys have been even more generic than most. With every manufacturer going to ‘global’ designs to save costs, this move just guarantees Chevy will stay at the forefront of dull. But so what? The only Chevy that’s not intended to ‘blend in’ is the Corvette anyway.
I think you’ve missed my point. Daewoo is not designing cars for Chevy. Daewoo is Chevy – at least in much of the world. And, if most consumer commodities (electronics, cameras, etc) are any guide, it will be in NA as well.
Distinctly American is certainly what works – in market segments where there is little or no direct competition. Distinctly American may work for a limited number of Middle Eastern or Russian millionaires. Unfortunately, you can’t be a success in the global marketplace selling niche vehicles. And in spite of big numbers in NA, Yukahoes and Chrysler 300s are oddities outside their home turf. If these products could not enjoy a meaningful penetration in global markets in the past, they will certainly find no broad favor in a world of increasingly expensive and dwindling resources. As much as you may bemoan the loss of the “good old days”, they are in the final analysis – gone.
American industry, for better or worse, must operate in the world as it is, not as it wishes it to be.
To put it another way – if America wants to make a meaningful contribution to the world, it needs to first join the rest of the world.
It’s kind of ironic, but the Daewoo Chevy’s are more reflective of GM’s place in the world (both in the US and abroad) than they are prepared to acknowledge.
This thought occurred to me this weekend as I passed a row of minivans on I-94. GM (and Ford) had to abandon the mini-van segment because they can’t compete in the high price segment against Toyota and Honda and can’t complete with Hyundai/Kia at the value end of the spectrum either. (Chrysler can’t either, but if they didn’t make mini-vans, what would they make?).
The sad fact for GM is that their car products are caught in this no-man’s land between the better regarded Japanese and German automobiles and value priced Koreans. GM wants to be a first-tier car maker, but reality is their products are shopped more for the discount than anything. Given their inherent cost structure and limited appeal, its a tough business proposition.
The GM of 2008 wouldn’t let Harley Earle or Bill Mitchell in the front door of the joint.
If this is it, it doesn’t look any worse than the competition. Of course, maybe that’s not enough when you’re coming from way behind.
http://www.automotive.com/future-cars/90/73950/112-0806-2011-chevrolet-compact/index.html
As long as they keep this global design language off of the Camaro and Corvette, I’ll go along with it.
This thing is going to be available in Spring 2009? Don’t they need a decent small car now-ish? Not that this will be a decent small car, since it is coming from GM. Oh well, I guess it’s still earlier than 2010.
Nice job on the naming too. I know I’m not the only one that’s thinking about the negative meaning of cruise or cruising. I guess they spelled it differently though, so it’s okay.
I read somewhere once that Chevy is being divided into global and Heritage products. The Corvette, Camaro and HHR fall in the latter category.
The Corvette is the one product that tells you someone at GM gets it. The form/name of the product stays the same and is continually improved, generation to generation and in-between. Kind of like a Civic.
Nobody has still answered my main question about this car: Does this replace the Cobalt in the United States, or will both be sold? If the latter, does Chevy really need two completely different compact cars? Talk about internal competition.
Geotphf:
I don’t know if anyone knows the answer yet. GM’s press release was pretty vague. However, the car is almost the same size as the Cobalt…
Then again, this IS GM we’re talking about…
Can GM at least try to stick with a naming convention? Cobalt, while a crappy name, at least hasn’t been around long enough to become poisonous to the American consumer. After one generation it will be gone?
When will the US automakers realize that switching names every product cycle is one reason, a major reason I think, that US car quality perception is so low. When someone mentions their “’83 Civic” still running, and that model name is still available in somewhat the same segment, that implies at least to me some sign of quality and longevity. Now mention a Contour, 500, Lumina, Uplander, Montana, Aerostar, Windstar, L300, etc ad nauseum… you get the feeling that US car makers produce such garbage that they have to rename it.
There are bigger issues here (ie, global architecture, movement to global nomenclature), but shouldn’t they have thought of that years ago? Who the hell is in charge of these companies.
Oh wait…