SlimKlim Wrote:Not sure I understand that logic, I'd think Mr. Consumer would be coveting the Acura when he was picking up that Accord back in the day, and would want to "move up" with each purchase, so he'd go for the TL or RL 20 years later.

G.Irish Wrote:

SlimKlim Wrote:Not sure I understand that logic, I'd think Mr. Consumer would be coveting the Acura when he was picking up that Accord back in the day, and would want to "move up" with each purchase, so he'd go for the TL or RL 20 years later.

You have just touched on the key failing of Acura as a brand. People who started with Hondas and moved up the economic ladder, inevitable go somewhere else when they want a luxury car, instead of Acura.

BFisch06 Wrote:I remember being in product meetings during my GM days where they talked about all of this. At least in the case of GM, models are purposefully designed larger and larger so that it looks like the car is getting better and better. "New Chevy Malibu - now with 23.2 inches of rear legroom - the most in class!" Manufacturers continue to try to keep their five-star safety ratings, and this is often most easily accomplished by expanding the current platform (bigger pillars and taller doors satisfy the constraints, but then the car looks stupid and they lengthen the platform to make it look better). In the meantime, other engineering teams are designing new platforms from the ground up to meet current or future crash ratings, and those end up being slotted in beneath what was just the entry-level platform. See the evolution of the Cadillac CTS, and the introduction of the ATS. When the Malibu was re-introduced in 1997 there was 1 other Chevy marketed beneath it: the Cavalier. As the Malibu has become larger and larger there are now 3 (three!) Chevy's that slot under it: the Cruze, the Sonic, and the Spark. I'm just drawing on my (albeit limited) experience at GM, but they totally design them larger and larger on purpose. This is the reason the STS ("Seville") Caddy isn't offered anymore - it got so big they ended production, which wasn't a problem as one of the smaller platforms "grew" to fill the portfolio hole: the CTS. At this point, the CTS wheelbase was exactly 3 inches shorter - and only 3 years later grew another 1.2 inches. The biggest problem I see here is that there aren't any letters before "A".

But yeah, I'm with most everybody here: it sucks and I wish they'd stop. I spoke up in one meeting and was shown a bunch of market research and statistics that basically said consumers want their chosen nameplates to grow with them and will only switch to a new nameplate to move to a different KIND of car (i.e. sports car = Corvette, SUV = Tahoe, CUV = Traverse, Pickup = Silverado, etc.). Of course, this doesn't apply in all cases or even all manufacturers.

Quote:Honestly with the new generation of kids graduating and buying cars wanting hippy cars or not wanting a car at all, I don't see that changing any time soon.

G.Irish Wrote:To be honest though, I thought the M division got off the rails as soon as the E36 M3 showed up. The E30 M3 was a true homologation special and I believe was the most successful touring car of all time. But with the E36 BMW discovered they could make a ton of money making the M3 a more luxurious GT. Over each generation they've just gone further down that road. All of the M3's have been plenty fast, but they keep getting signficantly heavier, with all of the luxo features and size creep.

Evan Wrote:Ultimately, I just expect BMW to live up to their "ultimate driving machine" slogan and the M division to amplify that further.

But they are following the Mercedes route of big comfy FI automatic luxobarges, which Im sure makes them a lot of money, but makes me roll my eyes when I hear their slogan on commercials.

Evan Wrote:

G.Irish Wrote:To be honest though, I thought the M division got off the rails as soon as the E36 M3 showed up. The E30 M3 was a true homologation special and I believe was the most successful touring car of all time. But with the E36 BMW discovered they could make a ton of money making the M3 a more luxurious GT. Over each generation they've just gone further down that road. All of the M3's have been plenty fast, but they keep getting signficantly heavier, with all of the luxo features and size creep.

I disagree, the M division wasnt always just about making homologation specials. The M5 came before the M3, and the M535 and M635 before that, and none of those were homologation street/race cars. The E36 M3 was no race car for sure, but it still had the harder edge of a drivers car (a drivers car that you can drive to work every day)

G.Irish Wrote:Oh well, I still think if BMW built more cars like the E30 M3 instead of the E92 M3 the world would be a better place.

Jake Wrote:

G.Irish Wrote:Oh well, I still think if BMW built more cars like the E30 M3 instead of the E92 M3 the world would be a better place.

But where would I put my Starbucks? And what's this extra brake pedal doing down there?

SlimKlim Wrote:Speaking of which, apparently Tesla is officially developing a sedan to slot in under the Model S, might be called a Model E. Where do I sign?

G.Irish Wrote:Oh well, I still think if BMW built more cars like the E30 M3 instead of the E92 M3 the world would be a better place.

D_Eclipse9916 Wrote:Remember, just my opinion even though I may piss off some purists.