RX-8, FJ Cruiser, XLR: just some of the recent nameplates which at one time generated healthy sales activity in the U.S., but after slowly fading in un-updated form, were put out to pasture. Now we can add to that list the Volkswagen Eos.
Cars like the Eos, which major on style over practicality, are prone to early bouts of desirability which wanes as newer, fresher, brighter, bolder, faster machines enter the fray. It’s not surprising to see interest in these vehicles dry up more quickly than it does with a midsize sedan or smaller crossover.
Consider the Chevrolet Equinox. Sales in the Equinox’s category have been steadily rising – vehicles such as the top-selling Honda CR-V and Ford Escape recorded record-high U.S. sales in 2013. But they are newer examples of the breed. The Equinox, on the other hand, was introduced in second-generation form for the 2010 model year. Yet in 2013 it, too, posted record-high U.S. volume.
On the other side of that coin, consider the Chevrolet Corvette. Although it’s a relatively common car for a vehicle of its type, at least in the United States, Corvette sales in its sixth iteration declined sharply in 2007, 2008, and 2009 and didn’t recover as the overall size of the new car market grew somewhat in 2010, growing only slightly in 2011 and 2012.
New is necessary. Corvette sales, now in C7 Stingray form, jumped 166% in the fourth quarter of 2013 and are up 236% so far this year. The Corvette is on track for its best U.S. sales year since 2006.
The Volkswagen Eos is certainly no Corvette, but neither were the Mazda RX-8, Toyota FJ Cruiser, or Cadillac XLR. (Actually, the XLR was sort of a Corvette.) The point stands, regardless. An automaker can’t introduce a sporty little convertible, even one without trackday intentions, and expect consumer interest to remain level during its tenure.
The first and only Eos has been around since the latter portion of 2006, when Mercury was selling a Montego – when Mercury was – and when an Eos buyer could have also looked at a Pontiac G6 GTP convertible.
Though facelifted, the Eos was always as it always was. Equipped with Volkswagen’s ubiquitous 2.0L turbocharged four-cylinder or, in the early part of its lifespan, a 3.2L V6, the Eos was a relatively attractive front-wheel-drive convertible. Along with the front-wheel-drive Volvo C70, it was tasked with fighting premium Germans from below and affordable droptop performance cars from above.
Most definitely from above. Back in the beginning, Mazda would sell you an MX-5 PRHT for about $5000 less.
And yet, the Eos was a new thing, and thus, when Mazda USA sold 15,075 more affordable MX-5s in 2007, Volkswagen sold 12,744 Eos convertibles. And in 2008, the Eos actually outsold the MX-5. The Eos outsold the MX-5 again in 2010 and 2011. Isn’t this a recipe for printing money? Sell the more expensive car, the one that shares a great number of parts with countless other high-volume machines?
Yes, it was, until Volkswagen invited a Beetle Convertible back to the party. Volkswagen USA sold 4178 Eos cabrios in 2013 (down from a peak of 12,837 in 2008), a figure which compares unfavourably with Volkswagen’s 18,050 Beetle Convertible sales. That’s more than the Eos’s total from all of 2012, 2013, and the first eight months of 2014 combined.
The Eos is dead because, by VW’s choice, it hasn’t been at all new since 2006 and because, by VW’s choice, the iconic and ancient Beetle nameplate became new again.
That shot is probably its best angle. Not an attractive car. A little too much bathtub influence.
Convertibles used to be sexy. Now, not so much, w/ a few exceptions. I guess it was OK for Buffy but certainly not a mistress for a man doing the midlife crisis thing.
Also, it was overpriced.
The Eos is also overpriced. $35K? No thanks. VW’s PQ35-based vehicles (including my Jetta SportWagen) are quite nice, but the value proposition drops sharply as you cross $30K (except the TT). There’s so much better out there for that price, including Camaro and Mustang Cabriolets…or a CPO IS-C , G37 cabriolet or VW’s own A5 cabriolet.
And I think the Eos would have looked *so* much better with a soft-top. Design wise, the upcoming Buick Cascada does everything for me that the Eos doesn’t…and hopefully Buick’s compact FWD cabriolet starts $8K-$10K lower than the Eos.
Eos with a soft top you say? Audi are bringing the A3 cabriolet to North America from next year. No Golf cabrio for you guys though, presumably because it would cannibalise Beetle sales.
Either one of those looks much better than the Eos, but the A3 cabriolet is going to be stupid expensive. The Golf Cabrio would hit the mark perfectly for me, but alas…
Kyree, the A3 cab starts at about $38K, not bad for what you get.
It always seemed to me that the Eos’s only reason for being was so VW could show that they could do the rigid-panel convertible thing. Since rigid roof convertibles seem to be on the wane, it comes as no surprise it is being dropped.
Price was the big enemy. Just like the C70 it was too expensive and long in the tooth. I’d go C70 over this though, much better looking and considerably more of a “high brow” image.
The Eos is for silly girls.
“The Eos is for silly girls.”
I could even do a Beetle Cabriolet, but this Eos just screams “sorority-girl car”.
I don’t know what it is – maybe it’s just the mushy styling, it is too soft. And always in baby blue as pictured.
You know the SC430 had the same issue. Too soft looking; for women. (Silly girls can’t afford an SC. Actually, most adult men can’t afford an SC.)
That’s true. The SC always struck me as a Country-Club-Wife-Mobile…
The things avg $25K wholesale *with miles* so yes they pose an obstacle to the financially challenged. The other nicety is a hardtop convertible with Lexus feel and reliability, most hardtops struggle with the latter.
Gen 2 C70 is shockingly expensive, check one out. Gen 1 is more budget friendly, but then you must suffer through all of the 850 issues in addition to all of the typical issues any ragtop gets with age.
Almost ALL of VW’s vehicles are overpriced, so why should this ugly little convertible be any different? :-P
The Eos was VW’s attempt to move upmarket in the US. Growing up there were a fair number of VW Cabrios running around, of all vintages. At $18-$23k they were a decent, fun buy.
But the Eos? This thing couldn’t have been put out to pasture soon enough. Good riddance.
The XLR had “healthy sales”? It never sold more than 3,730 per year.
Not exactly inspiring figures overall, but not terrible in the segement. We’re talking about a $100,000 2 seater Cadillac.
It wasn’t a Camry-beater, and it was going to be a challenge to touch the long-established SL and/or 911. But if Cadillac sold 3730 XLRs in 2013, that would have been more than the XK, GT-R, and R8 combined. Those aren’t high-volume cars, but nothing in the category of is. And given the price points in the segment and the fact that this was their first modern effort – it takes time to generate acceptance at that lofty price point – those weren’t terrible results.
The Lexus SC430 spanked XLR in total sales figures and mostly in sales YoY. The SL is the king of the segment in terms of production figures, but sales have dropped off since MY06. Did it make sense for GM to spend X hundreds of millions on a Cadillac Y-body spinoff, primarily for a North American audience, and only move about 15,460 total units? You make the call.
On a personal note, I lament XLR due to its inevitable junkyard status due to its use of Northstar (but don’t worry ELR will be there quickly to keep them company).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexus_SC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_SL-Class
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_XLR
“Did it make sense for GM to spend X hundreds of millions on a Cadillac Y-body spinoff, primarily for a North American audience, and only move about 15,460 total units? You make the call.”
That production volume would have returned them over 1B in revenue, so if they spent in the hundreds of millions, then it wasn’t necessarily a money loser, even if it didn’t make sales expectations.
The Lexus SC cost a good amount less than the XLR, so it’s not really surprising that it would sell more often.
Assuming $90K per unit: $1,391,400,000. But of this figure you’d have to figure out and subtract dealer markup and holdback costs. I suppose it may have been profitable.
Weren’t the Northstar’s head gasket issues resolved with a redesign in 2003-ish? The XLR came along right after this.
A man in my neighborhood has one, and I have to say it’s aging very gracefully. Granted, I’m a fan of the Art & Science look, which I know isn’t everyone’s cup of tea.
“Weren’t the Northstar’s head gasket issues resolved with a redesign in 2003-ish?”
So the legend goes…
I honestly thought the XLR got the Corvette engine, and that’s why it was so expensive.
You’re telling me it had a standard 4.6N*? No wonder nobody bought in.
The Nothstar was much more expensive to produce than the Corvette LS engines. The XLR could be had with an NA 4.6L Northstar good for 320hp or a Supercharged 4.4l version good for 470 or so.
Wouldn’t billing it as a Corvette-engined luxo Caddy made it much more desirable?
I feel that in the minds of consumers, LS V8 trumps N* – even those very fond of Cadillac.
The supercharged 4.4-liter Northstar was for the XLR-V. It was actually slightly down on horsepower (443 HP) versus the STS-V, which also used that engine (469 HP). The CTS-V, by contrast, has only ever had LS engines. I have driven the STS-V; it’s a hoot.
“I feel that in the minds of consumers, LS V8 trumps N*”
All day, every day.
Being OHV engines, a 472 or 500 will easily swap into the space formerly occupied by an OHC Northstar, no? ;-)
Sure, one could simply shoehorn it in.
I don’t see what would relegate the ELR to junkyard status, even with the batteries. It’s probably more-reliable than most conventionally-powered cars.
Powertrain, parts availability, and desire to own/restore/collect.
If all three of those check out, it might survive. I won’t be holding my breath.
Used w/good interior + LS swap = ?
A “fixed” XLR. Trouble is the darn things are going for way more than they should be. So 15K + LS motor and pcm etc + labor = $20-25K or more? Salvage/R-title might be the only way to make it work.
MY05 Cadillac XLS V8 Convertible
09/12/14 PA Regular $17,500 27,235 Avg GREY 8G P Yes
09/17/14 MILWAUKE Lease $10,300 57,484 Below RED 8G A No
08/26/14 ORLANDO Regular $21,000 59,738 Above BLACK 8G A Yes
09/17/14 ATLANTA Regular $17,800 79,440 Avg SILVER 8G A Yes
08/21/14 DFW Lease $15,000 89,312 Avg RED 8G A Yes
08/27/14 CEN FLA Regular $13,500 130,822 Below BLACK 8G Yes
Tim, I know your forte, your interest is in sales numbers. How, then, were you able to compare sales of the XK, 911, even a relatively rare R8 softtop, to the rarer than rare sight of an XLR. If the numbers sold of the Cadillac are what you say, then 90 percent or higher were stashed away somewhere, and not driven. Like other TTAC dudes, I notice cars a lot. If I’ve seen two XLRs on the road since they were introduced, I’m being generous. I’ve seen many more 911, XK, SL’s by a factor of 100 than the XLR. That includes the general Boston area, as well as Los Angeles.
Typical ‘Enthusiast’ reaction – all of the discussion about the engine, with no consideration to the segment…
The XLR was launched (for sale) in 2004, using the prior gen ‘Vette (C5) as a base (largely to expedite the launch, since it was effectively a prototype of the Art and Science design language.) It was produced through 2009, making the platform almost 12 years old. Would you believe GT shoppers in the late 00’s were typically not interested in a decade old Corvette?
While the interior was a reasonably nice place to be, and the car was a great boulevard/highway cruiser, it was competing with the R230 SL for volume and the e64 BMW 6 for unique styling. Complaints about the Northstar are typically overblown, especially considering that when you buy this segment new, you are going to have all work done by the dealer, and the manufacturer only really has to worry about getting the car through the first 3-4 years of ownership.
It would have been nice if GM had the breathing room to justify a 2nd generation or significant mid-model facelift based on sales that are actually impressive given the cost and numbers sold of comparable freshmen products, but they wanted 7-10k units a year from the car (which was unreasonable and idiotic.) The XLR-V was a great concept, as on paper it should have been a competitor to the SL55AMG, but that was using old-fashioned logic that people bought AMG cars for their performance and not just for the badge.
Great write-up. I had no idea that the XLR was based on the C5 architecture; I’d always thought it was a C6 derivative. And yes, it pains me when an automaker endeavors on a new and exciting project, then cancels it for not meeting their unrealistic expectations, or because they let the product rot on the vine for years. Maybach, for example, would have done a lot better against Bentley and Rolls-Royce if its cars had been (a) better styled and (b) not made utterly obsolete by 2007, with the arrival of the W221 S-Class. But that’s the auto biz.
You bring an interesting perspective to the conservation. Shortly before the introduction of the XLR, Mercedes retired the R129 SL in 2002, itself introduced in 1989 for MY90. If Mercedes could get away with such a thing in a niche segment, Cadillac could as well. Only enthusiasts would even ask which platform it rode on or what the age of said platform happened to be. The doubt mega rich folks who buy these products by in large care about the motor as you point out, or platform on which it rides. This segment is for people who can be choosy if they please, and Cadillac would have had to give people reasons to choose its XLR over the SL, 6 Series, XK8, and to an extent the SC430. My suspicion is this model was conceived and intended for North American audiences who liked Corvette but had “Cadillac” money to spend. Its competition was designed and intended for an audience in and outside of North America, thus the XLR could never have a global reach. They big money isn’t in the USA anymore and GM failed to capitalize on it.
A refresh might have been in order, but if you study the more recent history of GM, you’ll see they typically ride out all models a minimum of five years and then refresh or discontinue them. They chose the latter after the model I imagine did not meet their expectations.
I think that except for high-end luxo models, the ‘vert is close to dead. Young people used to love a droptop, but they are selling & the only owners I see are old farts.
Young people used to like a new car, generally. Most can barely swing a Versa Note now, let alone aspire to a convertible.
That said, I’m 30 and planning to be one of the first in line to plunk down my savings on an ND Miata.
The Miata is at least as much legendary sports car as convertible. It’s not a good marker for convertible demand in isolation. For much of the same reasons the Wrangler isn’t, either.
To me the real ‘incentive’ to an EOS was the hard top convertible WITH a power sunroof. Cool for people like me who like the sun but live in MW or other 4 season areas. I still never bought one though, guess that’s the problem…
It just made it too expensive for the segment, which was basically for people who couldn’t afford a BMW 3 convertible. They really needed to be in the mid-20s – which basically meant chopping the roof off of a Jetta/Golf and sticking a soft-top on it with a couple of braces tacked on.
Frankly I blame auto-publications for the death of convertibles. A lot of the convertibles have vanished because the magazines are always whining about flexy chassis, etc. Screw that. Sometimes all you want to do it cruise around with the top down and you don’t give a crap about the chassis having a bit of flex. Hell, I’d buy a 4 door convertible if they’d make one.
A neighbor has a low mileage VW Eos. Purchased new it’s primarily a summer car. She has binding and water leak issues with the retractable roof.
My Aunt has one and its not a bad car. It is overpriced tho and has very little trunk space. I would never buy one as I love the practicality of hatchbacks.
They still make those? I just assumed it died when the Golf changed two generations ago.
That’s what I thought too until last weekend. My friend’s fiancee lemon-lawed her way out of her BMW lease and showed up with a new Eos.
Huh. Sounds like everyone lost in that scenario…
She’s pretty, and she seems very nice. It is a bit worrisome that she’d think the solution to being constantly inconvenienced by a Bavarian POS is to replace it with a VW.
Lower Saxon POS does have a nicer ring to it, no?
Aaaaand I think you just answered why nobody’s bought them.
I’m not sure what the ask is for the US model, but here in Canada it STARTS at nearly $40,000 grand, base model! Thats why Volkswagen can’t get any traction in NA, their pricing is ridiculous for what you get.
No one really cares about ‘german’ engineering if it’s attached to a stupid expensive price tag, especially when we all know that the minute the warranty ends you’re on the hook for crazy expensive repair bills.
I don’t know why VW can’t figure this out? Typical German arrogance and NIH syndrome, I guess. It’s a nice little $30,000 car, provided you get a 10 year warranty with it, otherwise, aufweiderschein VW.
“Aufweiderschein”? Must be Plattdüütsch.
The top was a neat concept — retractable roof and moving panoramic sunroof in one. No one has done a similar retractable roof since. Unfortunately, it made the car a bit too heavy and expensive for something on a Golf platform. The roof should come back for a heavy luxo-cruiser, like an Audi A6-derived convertible.
Holy wordiness Mr. Cain! There’s a lot of filler here.
“Though facelifted, the Eos was always as it always was.”
And that.
I noticed that too. I think it speaks more about the Eos itself than about Mister Cain’s journalism style. Apparently it’s not even interesting enough to *write* about…
Audi/VW 3.2 V6 is a sweet engine with a nice power band and a decent exhaust note. Too bad they axed it.
The Eos had just come out when I was shopping for my middle-age crisis mobile. The styling did nothing for me, and I’m sorry but I don’t like folding hardtops.
It was priced $7-10,000 more than the Beetle, but I honestly think you’re looking at two perhaps close but different markets. Not everyone likes retro…although the new gen Beetle is far more palatable to me than the last gen.
I wish they made a Golf convertible; at a $5000 premium over the Beetle I don’t think there would be a ton of stolen sales.
I ended up with a low mileage off-lease Saab 9-3 Aero…I love popping the top…it’s a small celebration of life. Parts are hard to come by these days; repairs are typically Euro-priced.
3 acre moonroofs and standard air conditioning have killed the convertible, but I think there will always be a market for them however dimished…
Finally, I personally loved the styling of the XLR….
Oh, the 9-3 Cabriolet is *so* much better than the Eos…
Kyree,
To be fair yes the saab is better, I like the Eos and I looked at buying one used as a 2 nd car, I have a Sportswagon TDI with the Pano roof and love it, but the roof on the Eos scared the crap out of me, to much to go wrong, a soft top is a better convertible, esp for me as I would only use it in nice weather, they are both pricy to fix , but the later GM saabs are pretty decent cars, I found a Saab vert w a stick which was great , doubt the EOS was offered with one. And the Saab verts are cheap to pick up used the Eos not so much.
“…but the roof on the Eos scared the crap out of me, to much to go wrong…”
I concur. My SportWagen TDI’s panoramic roof has given me enough trouble, and the car is only two months old. You think I want to risk a VW folding hard-top?
And yes, soft-tops are much more my thing, IMO, if for looks alone. The only people who managed to pull off a good-looking folding hard-top are Mercedes-Benz with the SL-Class.
The Beetle is my favorite ‘vert since the S2000. The rest of the car kind of sucks (The Diesel/MT being my favorite of the latest version, and I’m sure as heck no diesel guy), but it is a nice ‘vert.
Over priced first and foremost.
There is no shortage of reasons why the EOS is dead
1. It looks awkward
2. The price for this Jetta with a hardtop was simply too high
3. The overly complex folding roof was even more unreliable than the rest of the car.
I’m amazed VW let it go for this long.
My sister-in-law wants one. She is my age (37 yrs old), double income, one child and has a doctorate of pharmacology. She is a dyed-in-the-wool VW buyer who made her first VW purchase in 1997 of a Jetta sedan 5-speed (which she still owns and her daughter learned to drive on.)
Now if she could have just let go of her Tiguan for something less practical VW could have sold at least one Eos in NM, cause I’ve never seen one on the roads here.
The EOS is dead. Do tell. Many of us never knew it was alive.
The few I have seen seem to be driven by deeply embarassed people, thus never ever with the top down.
The biggest problem with the Eos is that it’s ugly.
Convertibles are impractical, emotional purchases; buyer tolerance for dowdy styling is nil. The refresh helped, but nothing could save it’s awkward proportions atop a too-short wheelbase.
The Golf Cabriolet is a handsome little car, and would nicely split the difference between the too-precious Beetle and the too-expensive Eos. We’ll never see it over here as long as they’re churning out the Beetle en Mexico, though.
Sunroofs are installed on nearly 30-50% of new cars, why pay more for a drop top? If one wants a Honda EX series anything, you are forced to get a sunroof, for example.
If you think that a sunroof is similar to a convertible, you’ve never driven a convertible.
+1 (from the owner of both a PRHT Miata and a sedan with sunroof)
A couple of things. As someone who owned an early Miata, presently owns a Sunbeam Tiger and BMW 3-series coupe with moon roof, I think moon roofs are overrated and an unnecessary cost add-on. For what manufacturers say they cost retail(approx $1100), I’d much rather they spent the money fitting standard sport seats. On my BMW, I’ve had the roof open no more than five times in two years, and almost always the sliding sunshade is pulled closed, as well. It’s not a premium pert to me. As was posted before, having a sunroof is a real compromise, and not the same experience as driving a roadster or convertible in any meaningful way. I suggest anyone wanting a sunroof instead putting a little more money aside by forgetting the SR, and adding a real droptop car, like an older Miata to the family fleet
It’s dead because it didn’t sell well. And it didn’t sell well because it’s an overpriced boring looking convertible. Seriously… it cost $10,000 more than the convertible Beetle. A convertible hardtop is a neat feature, but not $10,000 worth of neat. Less power and a little worse fuel economy than the Beetle with the same engine too.
I would take a Beetle convertible any day over it.
Terribly complicated roof, prone to water leakage for way too many production years (VW, being a German company, did eventually get hold of that). What’s more, the roof could only be serviced by specialized dealers.
Oh and yeah, terribly boring – but that applies to any car from the VW group. Now you may start shooting.