The hot story last night was that GM is seriously planning a Corvette-branded EV crossover. And no, it wasn’t just a dream I had. Hey, if Ford can build a Mustang EV crossover, why not GM? That’s all I got…
Update this morning: There was obviously a good reason Chevy added the name “Sting Ray” to the C7 and C8 Corvette. It’s been known that GM has been mulling an extension of the Corvette line for some years.
Ever get the feeling that by 2025 the only vehicles you’ll be able to buy are crossovers, real SUV’s, and pickup trucks?
For American brands, that doesn’t seem to be speculation anymore.
It feels like we’re heading back the the 1930’s when, despite vehicles like the Auburn boat tailed speedster, sports cars weren’t looked on too favorably.
Makes sense. Never mind what some Curbside Carens will think about this potential “heresy” an EV CUV branded as a Corvette Emachine will be able to sell for more than the same exact vehicle just branded as a Chevrolet Emachine. Mustang MachE is the same way, people will pay more for the Mustang name than the Ford one as it generally has a more positive connotation than the maker itself (not that it’s entirely logical for a consumer to think this way of course). And of course both inherently promise performance. Note that the Mustang MachE doesn’t have the large blue oval on it, nor does the regular Corvette sport the Chevy bow tie and neither will the Corvette Emachine I’m sure.
The purists were offended when Porsche brought out it’s SUV. Look how that worked out.
Actually, Corvette should have been a separate marque from sometime after the C3 came out and their annual sales were strong enough. As long as the Cwhatever Corvette stays in production (like the 911), I can’t see reason for complaint.
Yup, the sold about a zillion of them and they really should not have. This is not Porsche snobbery but the truth: the Cayenne is totally underwhelming car. I have driven two of them and the quality of the materials is worse than my Golf.
They make tons of money on them and sell all they can make so more power to Porsche and VW!
Why can’t they use Camaro instead? The current Camaro will likely go out of production along with the rest of the Alpha platform in the next several years – no 7th gen model is currently planned, so its name should be “available.”
Camaro doesn’t have the brand equity of Corvette or Mustang. In the first place Camaro wasn’t an original like the other two. It was a copy of the original. And dropping it from production for eight years didn’t help, either.
Corvette and Mustang are “the franchise” for their respective manufacturers. Anything else is just a brand.
My thoughts exactly, Tom. The Camaro brand’s best days happened decades ago. What does GM have to lose?
Their investment. There’s a reason Ford didn’t call it the Mustang II Mach-E. Why use a name that isn’t associated with a strong brand image anymore?
In 2002 Porche released a crossover. People screamed sacrilegious but here we are, almost 20 years later. It’s still a success, it hasn’t diluted the value or reputation of the 911 and Carrera, or the Porche brand, and Porche is healthier than ever. If you can make it fit the expectations of the brand it will be successful and people will accept it. The Cyanne delivered performance, the Mache E delivers performance, the eVette will too and people will be cool with it.
One of these days, I’d like to see this work the other way. “GM announces Cadillac Escalade 2-seat convertible.”
“The Cadillac Escalade Biarritz”
Cadillac DeEscalate.
I tend to think of Corvette and Mustang as models, not brands, but the definition is fluid and I believe that in modern marketing-speak they are definitely brands. I am old enough to think of Chrysler, and to a lesser extent Buick, as premium-brands so I still struggle with a Chrysler minivan vs Plymouth or Dodge. To me, the Porsche SUV’s or even 100% badge-engineered Escalade seem more appropriate than a Corvette or Mustang crossover. But no one at GM is asking for my opinion, and one can’t argue with the success of the Chrysler branded vans.
To me this smacks of gm finally waking up. Finally instead of concocting a new brand (ie Saturn, Geo, etc.) to compete, or throwing ill-fitting models into a brand’s lineup (ie Buick Skyhawk, Olds Starfire, Cadillac Cimarron) they’re actually looking to capitalize on brand equity in a sensible forward-thinking way. Corvette could easily have been its own marque for decades, but if an ECUV can meet the expectations of the brand faithful it could easily succeed. Additionally, a small line of premium Corvette branded models could dovetail nicely into the existing dealership model, as it really could be marketed through Chevy, Buick and Cadillac dealerships, as the Corvette brand is easily distinguishable as a step apart from any of those brands’ offerings. It feels like a sensible move to me, provided it doesn’t roll out in typical GM fashion. But then again, this is gm, not GM.
One wonders how this would work under dealer franchise laws, which are written at the state level, and tilted heavily in favor of dealers. I can’t see Chevrolet dealers being thrilled if GM were to recast the Corvette as a separate brand and allow other GM dealers to sell them.
Agreed. I’m sure all Corvettes will still be legally titled as Chevrolets, and sold only by Chevy dealers. It’s not going to be an actual “brand”, but an extension of the Corvette line.
Let’s not forget that Chevrolet added “Sting Ray” to the C7’s name. They’ve clearly been thinking about a brand extension for years.
But they added “Sting Ray” to the C2’s name too, and nothing came of it. C3s through 1976 were Stingrays (now one word), but still no separate model or brand would be forthcoming.
Remember the Scion was titled as a Toyota.
That was implied though. You had to have a Toyota dealership to be able to have a Scion dealership. There were no “stand alone” Scion dealers. At least not according to corporate. The Toyota dealer in Milford, CT had its Scion dealership located across the street from the actual Toyota dealership.
Given that GM still basically takes a Silverado and adds some “Sierra” badges to make it into a GMC I’m not sure what the big deal is anyway.
GMC can bring back the Sprint and Cadillac can bring back Allante. Everybody goes home a winner.
That was implied though. You had to have a Toyota dealership to be able to have a Scion dealership. There were no “stand alone” Scion dealers
That’s precisely his point: Scions were a sub brand, not a genuine brand. They’re all titled as Toyotas. And the same would undoubtedly be the case with any Corvette extensions. It’s not like GM is creating anew division.
I was replying to
MTN
“Additionally, a small line of premium Corvette branded models could dovetail nicely into the existing dealership model, as it really could be marketed through Chevy, Buick and Cadillac dealerships”
Also scratch “Allante” it E’llante.
And the Geo was titled a Chevrolet.
Is this likely to be just another rebadge of a Korean produced CUV like everything else? or will they make a fibreglass bodied effort like the sporty Corvette, GM has virtually withdrawn from the market here only the buildings remain their warehouse is a km or two from where I live now and judging from the parking lot little is done there. So we are unlikely to experience whatever this brainwave turns out to be.
What other “Korean produced CUVs” does GM have right now?
Buick Encore
Buick Encore GX
Chevrolet Trax
Chevrolet Trailblazer
Buick Envision is China-sourced.
they should call it the corvette nomad. back in 1954 they had a prototype sporty wagon corvette with that name, finally its time has come.
Now that really makes sense!
I’m afraid this isn’t going to work out as well as Ford’s Mustang Mach-E
The Mustang started life as the sporty car for everybody, that retained some practicality and usability as a daily driver.
The Corvette was always seen and marketed as an exclusive model, the performance and style were always a much higher priority than suitability as a daily driver.
So a much bigger leap in mission from the Corvette and because it has been billed only as an exclusive sports car I expect the backlash from the Corvette faithful will be much bigger than it was from the Mustang crowd. Plus by many it will be seen as a “meee tooo” kind of thing at this point.
GM’s version of the Mustang Mach-E, using Cadillac’s new EV architecture, was the first thing I thought of, as well.
GM (I refuse to use lower-case letters)
could make these alleged “Corvette” SUV’s “limited production” like the Buick GNX and some Cadillac V’s were. We pretty much know that they won’t do this but they could and should.
Why not use “E-ROC Z,” “TRENZ EM,” or “E/28” though and leave the Corvette name alone?
I think a sporty SUV called Chevrolet E/28 would be cooler than “Corvette” but thats just me.
Chevelle was allowed to die with dignity. Corvette deserves the same death, if it comes to that. Of course, that was when “product planning” at GM meant something and wasn’t just an idle buzzword.
E/28 could work, don’t know about the E-ROC Z though since that brings back mullet mobile connotation for some.
We’re in the era of a dearth of creativity and imagination, and a glut of analytics and data. All Hollywood can come up with are remakes, reboots and continuations of old franchises, and it’s all too apparent now the establishment car industry likewise can’t come up with anything new either, so all they can do is regurgitate the past mine equity and subvert expectations to keep things fresh. Those old nameplates that died 40 years ago were lucky in hindsight, they didn’t live long enough to exploit. A SUV Corvette and Mustang are like decorated WWII airmen whose great grandkids are having lip sync to cardi B on tik tok for views. Dignity is dead.
The more I read comments like this, the more I think they need to get rid of all the overhyped and overpaid old and not-so-old fogeys running GM and put Curbside Classic in charge!
Great, the news just keeps getting better every day. We really are living a through a funhouse mirror postmodern version of the malaise era.
The “funhouse” was then.
Its a “haunted house” now.
At least today the cars are reasonably fuel-efficient and safe.
You know considering the state of the world today as we speak in mid January 2021, the gOoD oLd DaYs WeReNt So GoOd shtick is ringing pretty damn hollow.
I’ll take the sacrifices of the past, thank you.
>You know considering the state of the world today as we speak in mid January 2021, the gOoD oLd DaYs WeReNt So GoOd shtick is ringing pretty damn hollow.
And that’s relevant to my comment…how, exactly?
>I’ll take the sacrifices of the past, thank you.
You’ll take 12 MPG and dying in a crash just to prove a point on the Internet?
Yes.
Expanding the Corvette product line has been floating around GM forever. Here are the 1954 Corvette Dream Cars, including a wagon.
Now if the EV looks like the Nomad, I might be interested…
There’s nothing sacrilegious or heretical about the idea, and I get why GM and Ford are doing this, but it also screams of having no confidence in your product.
GM could do what it used to be really good at doing: build a product that people desire and build up the brand (or model) equity from that.
Slapping the Corvette name on a half-baked product will definitely not help it sell any better.
Agreed – it had better be absolutely outstanding by world standards, or it could drag the Corvette name down, undoing decades of hard work.
The major auto makers have a long, sad history of developing desirable product, then moving that name downmarket to increase sales. This requires building a new, desirable product with a new name…which will then be downgraded. Cycle repeats. Chrysler turned the sporty “Charger” into a family four-door. “Nova” became a Toyolet.
“Corvette” has always stood apart from this trend. Whatever brand-identity it had or has, it’s earned it on it’s own. Even during the worst days of “Corvette”–the last decade or so of the C3, from ’73 to ’82–the Corvette was an aspirational vehicle that stood apart from all else in the Chevy dealership.
Thank God that gm is going to destroy all that, like they did with BelAir, Wimpala, Malibu, and all the other names they once used on the upmarket versions of the body style, which then became the mass-market version years later.
gm is destroying *another* valued name–Chevy’s PREMIUM name–for the sake of political-correctness and “sales”. May the circle, be unbroken.
Porsche did not name their SUV the “911 Grande”. This is a sad day for “real” Corvette enthusiasts.
The Corolla-Nova (and its successors, the Geo/Chevy Prizm and Pontiac Vibe) were actually good small cars, though.
I wonder how many real “enthusiasts” there actually are that buy the product new.
The Corvette hasn’t sold more than 35,000 in the US in any dingle year for the last decade and more often than not it was closer to half of that (I guess there’s my answer, that seems like a not very large number. There’s almost no doubt that they can outsell it with an intelligently designed EV CUV. Might as well leverage the name for something. Ford is likely going to sell many more Mustang Mach-E’s than if they’d named it the Edge Mach-E or Escort Mach-E due to the free publicity alone.
GM has been building the Corvette in 2 door/2-seat form for almost 70 years and only cracked 35000/year a dozen times, barely, it was never intended to move volume, it isnt a RAV4. Are we suddenly in a place where every single nameplate in the lineup needs to sell 200k units/year to justify their existence? If these are successful how long will it take before the shareholders start questioning why keep that costly coupe version?
I’m going to be real curious how well these things will actually do, the jury is still out. Real “enthusiasts” are the ones who care about the names, why the presumption regular folk will buy them for the names? Have buyers become so cynically shallow that the name is what matters more than the shape and design of the vehicle it’s attached to? Even a children’s power wheels Mustang resembles a real Mustang more than Mom’s Mach E does.
If I were a shareholder of either of those companies then yes, each car would and should need to justify its existence one way or another. If the names can help provide more sales (and eventual profit), then use them everywhere. Ford seems to think its own name is tarnished, they don’t even put it on the Mach-E (or the Mustang for that matter, do they?). The Corvette doesn’t have an obvious Chevy badge or bowtie on it either from what I’ve seen. Certainly not as compared to any truck in either lineup. That’s a bit odd, every other manufacturer displays their company name, if anything the model name may be deleted. So the model seems to be bigger than the brand in these cases.
The “costly coupe version”, i.e. the real Mustang and Corvette will stay around for the exact same reason that Buick still exists in the US, they’ll be needed to provide the umbrella for the ones that actually sell – electric brand extensions here, Buick models in China. But eventually there’ll likely be electric versions of those as well, and they’ll likely perform better than the older tech. The electric brand extensions will likely BE what allows the ones “enthusiasts” like to continue to exist, there isn’t that much of a business case for them otherwise.
The only “enthusiasts” that matter to a manufacturer are those that actually purchase the cars they are enthused about OR if those cars are either too expensive or too limited in scope for those enthusiasts then how those cars cast a halo effect onto other aspects of the range, there have been plenty of 4-cylinder Mustangs sold over the decades, hardly enthusiast fodder and likely not the car you think of when you hear the name. If my wife was a “Mustang enthusiast” I could never get her to consider an actual Mustang for driving kids or clients around in, too impractical, but I could very likely get her to consider a “Mustang Mach-E” to do the same. Nobody would be enthusiastic about an “Edge Mach-E” or a “Fusion Mach-E”. Thus, everybody wins.
Nobody cares about the guy whose only connection to the brand is the hat he wears (except for whoever sells the hat). Having a Mustang Mach-E or a Corvette E-Machine isn’t going to make the OG enthusiast no longer consider the regular Mustang or Corvette and even it does, as long as another one (or multiple) of the name extension is sold in its stead, the manufacturer wins. The average person on the street likely can’t tell an average Ford from an average Chevy, they can however likely tell you who makes a Corvette and a Mustang. That’s called leveraging the brand.
It’s possibly different where you live, but around here the kids seem to know and are interested in what various electric performance cars are available and seem far more interested in those than the regular ones. I see (anecdotally) far more 20- and 30-somethings in Tesla Model 3’s than in recent Mustang GT’s, never mind the Corvette. Many of those people MAY be interested in an electric car with a historically exciting name, but just as much may decidedly NOT be interested in a Ford or a Chevy electric Insert-Generic-Model-Name-Here over a Tesla, Audi, or VW and that’s who both of these are looking to compete against.
No matter how they do, the Mustang and Corvette part of the name won’t hurt the sales of the electric variant, if they fail, they likely would have failed worse without those names. Chevy and Ford are mass market makers and in general not aspirational brands. Mustang and Corvette are though, and that’s why it makes sense to use the names.