2013 Chevrolet Caprice on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Europeans ask Chevy to bring Volt back to Europe

A group of French fans is asking for a jolt of support from General Motors to get the 2016 Chevrolet Volt across the pond. The Association Amperistes et Amis des Vehicules Rechargeables is running a Change.org petition that currently has 383 signatures out of a goal of 500. While the attempt is admirable, it's probably going to take a lot more than several hundred people for the model to make a return to the continent after the poor showing of the Opel Ampera – first-gen Volt's European cousin. The group's major argument for bringing a version of the second-gen Volt to Europe is that consumers need "an intermediate choice between expensive or range-limited pure electric cars and plug-in hybrids with a miserable electric range." Furthermore, such a vehicle would prod the competition to produce similarly efficient electrified models. They also lavish praise on the abilities of the Ampera for its long EV driving range. The supporters aren't entirely kind to GM in the petition, though, and claim the company excluded the original car from marketing efforts there. The Ampera actually enjoyed a strong European launch with more orders than initially expected and briefly topped the best-sellers list among EVs there. It was even named 2012 European Car of the Year. Those halcyon days didn't last long, and by 2014 sales fell off to a trickle. The waning reception caused GM's decision not to introduce a version of the new 2016 Volt there or in Australia. Related Video:

GM’s move to Woodward is the right one — for the company and for Detroit

Back in 2018, Chevy invited me to attend the Detroit Auto Show on the company dime to get an early preview of the then-newly redesigned Silverado. The trip involved a stay at the Renaissance Center — just a quick People Mover ride from the show. IÂ’d been visiting Detroit in January for nearly a decade, and not once had I set foot inside General MotorsÂ’ glass-sided headquarters. I was intrigued, to say the least. Thinking back on my time in the buildings that GM will leave behind when it departs for the new Hudson's site on Woodward Avenue, two things struck me. For one, its hotel rooms are cold in January. Sure, itÂ’s glass towers designed in the 1960s and '70s; I calibrated my expectations accordingly. But when I could only barely see out of the place for all the ice forming on the inside of the glass, it drove home just how flawed this iconic structure is.  My second and more pertinent observation was that the RenCen doesnÂ’t really feel like itÂ’s in a city at all, much less one as populous as Detroit. The complex is effectively severed from its surroundings by swirling ribbons of both river and asphalt. To the west sits the Windsor tunnel entrance; to the east, parking lots for nearly as far as the eye can see. To its north is the massive Jefferson Avenue and to its south, the Detroit River. You get the sense that if Henry Ford II and his team of investors had gotten their way, the whole thing would have been built offshore with the swirling channel doubling as a moat. This isnÂ’t a building the draws the city in; itÂ’s one designed to keep it out. Frost on the inside of the RenCen hotel glass. Contrasted with the new Hudson's project GM intends to move into, a mixed-use anchor with residential, office, retail and entertainment offerings smack-dab in Detroit's most vibrant district, the RenCen is a symbol of an era when each office in DetroitÂ’s downtown was an island in a rising sea of dilapidation. Back then, those who fortified against the rapid erosion of DetroitÂ’s urban bedrock stood the best chance of surviving. This was the era that brought us ugly skyways and eventually the People Mover — anything to help suburban commuters keep their metaphorical feet dry. The RenCen offered — and still offers — virtually any necessity and plenty of nice-to-haves, all accessible without ever venturing outside, especially in the winter, but those enticements are geared to those who trek in from suburbia to toil in its hallways.

GM won't really kill off the Chevy Volt and Cadillac CT6, will it?

General Motors is apparently considering killing off six slow-selling models by 2020, according to Reuters. But is that really likely? The news is mentioned in a story where UAW president Dennis Williams notes that slumping US car sales could threaten jobs at low-volume factories. Still, we're skeptical that GM is really serious about killing those cars. Reuters specifically calls out the Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac CT6, Cadillac XTS, Chevrolet Impala, Chevrolet Sonic, and the Chevrolet Volt. Most of these have been redesigned or refreshed within the past few model years. Four - the LaCrosse, Impala, CT6, and Volt - are built in the Hamtramck factory in Detroit. That plant has made only 35,000 cars this year - down 32 percent from 2016. A typical GM plant builds 200,000-300,000 vehicles a year. Of all the cars Williams listed, killing the XTS, Impala, and Sonic make the most sense. They're older and don't sell particularly well. On the other hand, axing the other three seems like an odd move. It would leave Buick and Cadillac without flagship sedans, at least until the rumored Cadillac CT8 arrives. The CT6 was a big investment for GM and backing out after just a few years would be a huge loss. It also uses GM's latest and best materials and technology, making us even more skeptical. The Volt is a hugely important car for Chevrolet, and supplementing it with a crossover makes more sense than replacing it with one. Offering one model with a range of powertrain variants like the Hyundai Ioniq and Toyota Prius might be another route GM could take. All six of these vehicles are sedans, Yes, crossover sales are booming, but there's still a huge market for cars. Backing away from these would be essentially giving up sales to competitors from around the globe. The UAW might simply be publicly pushing GM to move crossover production to Hamtramck to avoid closing the plant and laying off workers. Sales of passenger cars are down across both GM and the industry. Consolidating production in other plants and closing Hamtramck rather than having a single facility focus on sedans might make more sense from a business perspective. GM is also trying to reduce its unsold inventory, meaning current production may be slowed or halted while current cars move into customer hands. There's a lot of politics that goes into building a car. GM wants to do what makes the most sense from a business perspective, while the UAW doesn't workers to lose their jobs when a factory closes.