CR doesn't just base their views on others. They hire a whole staff of people with automobile engineering degrees.

 

Speaking as an engineer myself, I appreciate the understanding of technology and the technological honesty that is evident in reviews by engineers, especially when compared to the "bull**** baffles brains" that comes out of some of the non-engineer reviewers. But, in my experience, the non-technologically-oriented sometimes do not understand -- and so may ignore -- what the engineers try to explain.

So, while CR reviews may be more honest, reviews by Autoblog are more popular (and likely to be more frequently quoted).

 

Yes, that doesn't surprise me.....you sound like an engineer (and a quite competent one) in many of your comments. Some non-engineers mix a lot of their own emotions and irrelevant side-issues into the picture instead of simply describing the car itself....(Jeremy Clarkson and the Washington Posts's auto-reviewer, Warren Brown, IMO, both get carried away in that department). In my own reviews (I'm not an auto engineer of course, but have been free-lance reviewing for many years), though I'll make some personal statements and opinions once and a while, I try to keep emotion out of it, and simply describe the vehicle from stem to stern in detail, so that people basically know what they are getting for their money.

Hoovey posts a lot of Autoblog reviews right here in Car Chat. Many of them, IMO, are quite good....though I agree that some of them fall short.

 

let's get back to the buick and not reviews of CR and other reviews, thanks.

 

Anyway, I find the initial sales strategy curious. Introduce the most expensive versions first. Does Buick really think that their vehicle is so compelling that people not willing to spend $45k+ on a Buick will sit back and delay their vehicle purchase until the version that is right from them comes to the US market? That could work for, say, a Miata, but I don't see it working for this car.

 

Actually, if you remember far enough back (the summer of 1989) to when the Miata was introduced, technically, it didn't really work for the Miata, either. That's because if the factory wasn't shipping the most expensive versions, the dealers themselves were price-gouging on the Miata's enormous initial demand and short supply. So, you paid an arm and a leg either way. There was one local dealership at the time that said they were selling Miatas at list price, with no markup, but I didn't actually see much evidence of it.

You do have one point, though, on the Envision. The Miata, at the time, didn't have any real American-market competitors...the Honda S2000 had not yet been released, and the open-top British sports cars/roadsters were no longer available. In contrast, the Envision is being released right into what is already literally a marketful of competitors.....with even more competitors to come.

 

Yes--this was my point. I did not recall all those details of the Miata introduction, but it was a unique car in high demand.

 

As mmarshall said, they could have rebadged the Equinox or Terrain platforms to recover any lost sales from Buick loyalists instead of importing what is a made-in-China, sell-in-China vehicle.

But the cost advantage from building in China must be significant enough to make it profitable, although it's certainly not reflected in any sort of price-undercutting. That could be due to not wanting to "cheapen" the image of your product by setting too low a price.

According to the Wiki entry on the Envision, they've been building it there since 2014 and GM didn't want the costs associated with starting a whole new assembly line in the States vs just expanding GM Shanghai production.

 

I read that the next-gen Equinox and Terrain will migrate to the same D2XX/D2UX platform of the Envision.

If GM didn't want the costs associated with assembling the Envision in North America, they must not plan on selling enough to keep an assembly line going... or they could just be waiting until the next-gen Equinox / Terrain are ready, at which time, all 3 could be built on the same line.

GM seems to do this, which is to start production of new models overseas and import to North America for some time before the North American assembly line is ready. This was done for the Cruze, which was imported from South Korea (as I recall) before production started here. It was also done with the current-gen Regal, which was imported from Germany until production started in Oshawa, Ontario, Canada.

 

Interesting. That means you offload the initial development costs to another plant no matter where it is located, and then see if people will buy regardless of where you make it. But it may also be sending a signal to the Big Three's union - see what we can do? The marketing of the Envision will likely not say, "made in China". But did GM maybe take a page out of Apple's strategy?

Not many people object to underpaid, over-worked Chinese workers manufacturing their iPads or iPhones. Sales have soared and profits are ridiculous.

Traditionally American and Canadian domestic car buyers feel brand loyalty and patriotism as a factor in buying a Big Three vehicle. Maybe times are changing. If this test works out you'll see more than the Envision being made in China.

 

I wouldn't spend $40,000 on a new car made in China, be it a Volvo, Buick, Toyota, or whatever. Getting parts for this car down the road will be a real PITA if not impossible.

 

just go to walmart.

 

Walmart, or any other discount store, probably won't be much of a factor. Not only do new-car dealerships routinely stock parts (or order them) for anything they currently sell, but, if or when the vehicle is discontinued, Federal law, in the U.S., also requires auto manufacturers to keep parts in stock for anywhere from 7-10 years after, depending on thy specific type and function of the part. That's because (also by Federal law) a number of safety and emissions-related parts are warrantied 8-10 years.

 

That was a good strategy for GM, and it worked.

 

At some point, more and more car manufacturers are going to go to China to make some cars. Lexus and all of their competitiors included at some point. It is a competitive advantage type of thing, the Chinese market is growing and each manufacturer will have to operate there, its inevitable.

If I was to pay a premium for a Toyota (Lexus), MB, BMW, or Audi, I would sure want it to come from the homeland, ie: Japan or Germany.