Forecasting the release of future vehicles is both an art, and a science. Befriending industry insiders and creating possible roadmaps, from eavesdropping on company employees and monitoring the trademark office, and then being the first to accurately report on a particular future product can land you on the industry’s equivalent of the “do not fly list.” Suffice to say, it’s a tough craft. But the game is a little different when you’re an investment firm whose duty is to provide investors with reliable information about the past, present, and future state of a company — such as General Motors, for instance.
So when parts of the Morgan Stanley Auto Product Guidebook get into the hands of those able and willing to share, we listen. Among the future GM products listed in the Guidebook are:
Buick
The Verano hatchback is evidently due this year. The car is more or less available in China as the Buick Excelle XT (Mr. VeranoHatchForUS finally gets his wish, and we hope the Cruze hatch will follow).
Cadillac
An all-new SRX is due in 2014… although whether it will continue to utilize a modified Theta architecture or switch to the new Alpha platform isn’t mentioned. Our bet is on the latter.
The coveted Cadillac flagship (LTS or ZTS?) will arrive in 2015, apparently.
Chevrolet
Apparently, the Orlando MPV will make a U.S. debut in 2013. We haven’t heard a peep about this, so whether this is true — or not — remains to be seen.
A “small SUV” is due in 2014 — which could be the all-new Equinox on the D2 platform shared with the next-gen Cruze, or something smaller, such as the Trax.
Meanwhile, a Volt Crossover is set for 2015. We’re willing to bet it’s the CrossVolt.
If you’re wondering why GMC isn’t on the list, it’s because there’s nothing for Big Red in Morgan Stanley’s books. Looks like the brand may have to make due with the 2014 Sierra for a little while.
That said, keep in mind that these are educated guesses, rather than official plans that somehow made their way to Morgan Stanley. However, the company did handle the New GM’s Initial Public Offering and holds close ties with Opel chief Steve Girsky and GM CFO Dan Ammann.
Comments
Say what? …. 12 days after I gave up on GM and went elsewhere with my money.
Oh well, they’ll probably leave out the rack attachment slots anyway. Buick buyers are not outdoor types. Those people live in Europe.
Ahh yes, camping and the great outdoors, the backbone of European family summers.
Boy Scouts of America vs Hitler Youth.. now that is a stand off for the history books.
I always thought the typical Euro summer vaca was going to Paris and learning how to smoke a pack of unfiltered Gauloises in a day.
@VeranoHatch Those people simply buy Chevys (and not Buicks).
Alex, the comment on the outdoors was obviously TIC, but seriously, explain then why not a single Chevy, Ford, or Dodge offers attachment points, yet we find them on most foreign makes (even sedans) where there is a hatch variant. Do foreigners buy real small cars and then attach a luggage carrier to the roof? Is it because their cargo is relatively permanent, whereas ours is just for weekends? What is it?
A woman relatively new to our paddling club just bought a Honda CRV that came with low profile rails. She did not realize she had attachment points on the rails for her rack, so she bought clips to latch the rack onto the doors. Needless to say, the arrangement looked awful and was clearly deforming her weather stripping. The point here is that there seems to be a general ignorance about this in the U.S., particularly among the manufacturers.
Serious reply? Most US folks who want to put crap on their roof buy SUV/CUV’s while Europeans do not buy CUV’s/SUV’s in any quantities. So they need the roof rails. Our SUV’s/CUV’s have roof rails for racks.
You gave the perfect example, your women friend bought a CUV CRV which has the roof rack.
This!
We have SUVs, CUVs and trucks that are far more capable for the “outdoors” than a Jetta Wagon with roof rails.
Another thing with roof racks on small cars, they look ugly as sin unless you’re one of those Vdub clowns who puts one on just for show and paints their rims bright orange and tucks their wheels. I normally don’t mind the various sects of car culture, but the Vdub and donks crowd brutal.
Andrew/Vette,
SUVs and CUVs do not get good gas mileage compared to a hatch/wagon. They fit with the American gas-guzzling give-me-cheep-fuel mentality. SUV/CUVs are not as stable, they don’t handle as well, and they are not as fun to drive. That is a huge price to pay for a little more ground clearance. The woman owning the CRV would certainly like to get the mileage I am getting. My take: Her desire for the CRV has everything to do with riding high rather than being “better for the outdoors.” Woman like SUVs for the view. It’s like adding high heels to your wheels. (I think she said her husband went for the Acura sport wagon.)
FYI, people who use cars to transport their boats/bikes do not necessarily drive off-road. You are making the same erroneous assumptions that the auto-makers tend to make. And a hatch/wagon with rails/rack does not need to look bad. The reason many do look bad is the result of very poor offerings from the manufacturers. My Whispbar just arrived today. Perhaps I’ll post a picture.
I made the apparent erroneous assumption because you said you’re an “outdoors type”.. I don’t know about you but when I go camping I dont just pull off the highway and pitch a tent.
And no, roof racks on small cars look bad because they are roof racks on small cars.
There are quite a few aftermarket permanent roof rack options.
Also, isnt the WhispBar a variation of a clip-on? And are you aware the the Whispbar doesn’t meet crash test standards when loaded?
Andrew, the roof line of a hatch/wagon can be identical to an SUV/CUV, so why does a rack on a small car look bad in your opinion? Being a GM fan you may have visions of the Pontiac Vibe rack, or perhaps the Equinox rack. If so, then I would have to agree with you. Those are ugly and hardly functional.
FYI, the Whispbar (distributed now by Yakima) is offered with multiple fit kits [track, fixed point, flush/raised rail, gutter, permanent (bolt on), and yes, naked roof (clips)]. I’ve chosen the flush bars with a fixed-point attachment (to the slots provided by Mazda), which will provide quiet, aerodynamic performance with a clean, elegant look. Mazda does sell their own system to work with square Thule bars. My guess is that’s what a lot of people think they would get without having SUV-like factory rails.
What crash standard does the Whispbar not meet? Cross bars are not there to protect passengers and are not part of a car’s structural system. Bars are rated by the weight they are designed to carry, which in this case is 130 lbs.
When GM tried to market the Sonic for the “active lifestyle,” they selected a square Thule clip-on system for the Carmichael Concept Car. It was impressive in neither looks nor performance, but good networking/marketing by Thule.
FYI, Subaru caters to bikers/boaters better than any other car manufacturer. They even offer discounts to Paddle America Club members. Subaru rack systems are beautiful, even the one made for the WRX. Most Imprezas I’ve seen have been hatches, and Subaru’s larger vehicles (to me) appear closer to wagons than they are to SUVs. GM is clearly not trying to compete with Subaru or Mazda.
Well that’s because Subaru is that type of brand. Similar to how Jeep once upon a time only made trail rated vehicles.
And the appearance doesn’t really have anything to do with the aesthetics of the rack itself. It’s the fact that “roof racks on small cars look bad because they are roof racks on small cars.”
Crash standards aren’t necessarily about protection and the distribution of forces.
When the rack is loaded with it’s spec’d weight, and the vehicle is subject to a front end collision at a test, spec, speed, the rack fails. Creating a ‘roof rack spec’d test weight’ missile.
Andrew, the canoe/kayak bow/stern tie-down lines are what prevents a “missile,” not the rack cross bars. I don’t carry bikes, but for those I would suggest hitch-racks. But even if bikes are placed on the roof to ease trunk/hatch access, I would rather have that 30 pounds thrown forward in a collision than have it hit me in the back of the head from the cargo area of a large SUV. And in either case, the roof of a hatch is a much easier reach than that of an SUV. The women love them, but they’re also either carrying ladders or asking for help all the time.
blah blah blah
same oh same oh comments.
The manufacturers build what the US buying public wants. I love my Enclave and we have two in our garage. I can throw in what I want and carry 7 people when I need to. Yesterday I had 3 kids and there ski gear. Tomorrow I am picking up four bathroom cabinets for my house. And I, as most of the rest of the country, do not care if they cannot whip the vehicle around the corner or what ever. We buy them for the functionality, not going off road.
I hear this constantly all over the net how hatches are so much better yet the proof is in the pudding. Hatches are a niche market. Look at Honda, what used to be the hatchback company. They now have only the subcompact, low volume Fit left. They even tried to “crossdress” a hatch with the Crosstour and that fell on its face.
Sure there are folks like you who lament the loss of hatches but the manufacturers build what will sell profitably, not throw away money on dead segments.
So Vette, you have some cars that double as trucks. Obviously your hauling needs outweigh the issue of fuel consumption and driving dynamics. That’s fine for you, but you are not everybody.
GM’s decisions are based on the need for high profit per vehicle and not necessarily on what the average buyer needs. If no one wanted them, then no one would be making premium small cars. I would not have been able to buy what I just bought.
@VeranoHatch You know, I’m not sure why no American vehicles have the roof rack attachment points. Coincidentally, my fiance’s Jetta TDI has them, and I’ve been thinking about adding a roof rack to hers for skis/snowboards. So that’s a good point.
To that, I don’t think VWs look in any way inferior with a roof rack strapped on to the roof… as long as it’s the VW base carrier bars, I can even say that I really like the look of the car with them. Cool thing is that they’re flexible, too — so you can add different attachments to them.
In any event, I hope that Chevy and Ford (who cares about Dodge?) integrate the roof rack attachment into their vehicles — which would undoubtedly allow them to appeal to a wider demographic and not be out-done by VW and company.
??, we have an Eagle scout on the way and we drive two Buicks.
That seems awfully soon for the big Caddy, if in fact they are developing a whole new platform for it (Omega).
No surprise about the SRX, ‘confirmation’ about it being put on the Alpha is intriguing though. I want to see a mid-full size SUV to slot between the SRX and ‘Sclade, I’ve always liked the Acadia Denali.
Orlando being sold in the US is a great move, I’m seeing more and more on the roads here. It’s a great option for families. Cheaper than a Mazda5, I think it looks better, more power and torque, and the same MPG… I think?
No colorado or cayon?
First I would like to say, that picture of the ciel should be the reason only to build a flagship caddy……just look at that, stunning….but I thought a SUV volt was going to Buick, something on the lines of the Buick envision concept shown a while back…..I would love to see some coupes from Buick (lacrosse)…..one thing I would like to see is Cadillac ATS shooting break built off the coupe v.s. the sedan instead of the conventional wagon…….since both coupe and wagon are low volume, it will be quite the niche car..
They’re not saying anything for the Terrain??
I am thinking these are actualy a year out from the years they have listed…
Don’t tease me with Cruze hatch, again. I’ll believe it when I see it in the show room. GMC should get the Granite. Would appreciate a tighter time line on these vehicles.