GM to kill full-size SUVs!

Good riddance!

@billt9

It's bad business when the SUVs are your cash cows and you've been building small cars at a loss (or near a net-profit of zero) for decades as your entire business model.

Bad move.

There is a need for this kind of vehicle, just not at the volumes that we've seen in the last 20 years.

Those that need a full size SUV will just move to the Ford Expedition.

bilt9

There will always be a need for large vehicles to pull trailers or haul folks off into the wilderness.

If the full-size SUVs are killed, these customers will simply buy (larger still) pickups, as they are up to the task of doing what they need done.

Interesting developments... I agree there is a need for large suv's but not in the vast array of needless model rebadges that GM has.

Escalade was born completely out of the suv-craze and needs to die. It is simply a cash cow that is dead.

Hopefully this focuses whatever remains to become better and more focused on meeting the true customer's needs and not those of the "lifestyle" consumer.

I used to understand the need for this segment prior to 2000, but now that you can get a 4-door truck, I don't really understand the need to have full size SUV's other than just as a niche vehicle.

It's hard to believe that GM would just let the Suburban die. Maybe they will just keep the current model in production for several more years in Texas and mothball Janesville.

I understand the need for suv's. It's all about options and sometimes a enclosed wagon does the job better than a pickup for some. Also, a 4 door pickup is quite long and maybe unwanted for some too.

I like fullsize pickups but you can't deny the incredible length of a 4 dr crew w/ 6' bed is hard to manuver relative to a Tahoe.

Maybe future people that are looking for a full sized SUV to pull their boat will look at USED vehicles. What a concept!

Funny how the rest of the world seemed to get along just fine without huge SUVs.

Funny how the rest of the world seemed to get along just fine without huge SUVs.

It's better than that lame ass prius bullshit.

The rest of the world gets along with a completely different lifestyle. We live in America. In this country, we are free to live the way we choose. Let's remember that.
Just because YOU can't see the logic in something does not make it wrong. It just makes you ignorant to a different point of view.

While I agree that many people don't need fullsize suv's and the logic of some of them is superficial, you can walk down that slippery slope and say we should all be driving Toyota Echos. It's just not reality.

I agree that people should keep their cars longer and buy used vehicles more but that is a choice.

Maybe this will bring sense back to the fullsize market, that's my hope.

That's it. GM has completely lost it! This makes no sense. Cut back on shifts and factories. Cut the Yukon and Escalade. But GM can't cut the Suburaban/Tahoe. There is a need for these two vehicles that the Traverse/trucks can't fill. The suburban name is iconic, and the Tahoe is a best in class seller. Not a smart move.

+1, cruiserhead1.

This doesn't necessarily mean GM won't keep building them; it just means the current models will probably stay in production longer, with smaller volumes. That makes business sense -- why spend the billions to develop a new version of something that people aren't buying in the numbers they used to?

The current generation of these vehicles was introduced as early 2007s in spring 2006, so they likely have some time left. I remember GM being criticized at that time for bringing out the new versions when the sales had started declining even then. No story happened to mention that those vehicles would have already been in the pipeline, so what was GM to do -- cancel them before their introduction and throw away all the development dollars they had already spent?

It used to be that a pickup truck design and its derivatives stayed in production a longer time than what we've seen recently. (GM's'73 through '87 pickups, and Ford's '80 through '96 pickups survived with just cosmetic tweaking during their run). With the smaller sales numbers, I think vehicles like this will still be around as long as there's some demand for them, but they'll go longer between redesigns.

Also, GM has delayed development of the next generation Corvette (C7) as well, but they're not discontinuing the car. I think we'll see more of this, while the automakers re-focus their remaining dollars on the type of vehicles that are in high demand now.

It's a tough business to be in, particularly now.

So now if you have a family of 8, your options are a Sequoia or an Armada?

"There is no word yet as to how long the current models will remain in production."

That says it all. These models will continue until 2014. I would bet money that they will get a "signifigcant update" in 2015.

I think Ford will probably go the same way, and kill the Navigator.

"So now if you have a family of 8, your options are a Sequoia or an Armada?"

Absolutely not! GMC still has the Lambda platform that reportedly can hold 8 (albeit not 8 ADULTS)

The Ford Expedition is a direct competitior, but even more so, if you don't need the towing load, you have a plethora of minivan choices (Odyssey, Sienna, etc.) that are spec'd to handle 8.

Lets also not forget the gold standard of people hauling, the Ford E-Series. When you think about it, the E-Series allows you to "have your cake and eat it too", with a passenger load eclipsing anything noted above and an impressive towing load to boot!

"GM to kill full-size SUVs!"

Bob, what is up with this title? As the article states, their future is unclear, but that doesn't begin to justify an overly conclusive title like this.

Y'all remember the famous Mark Twain quote?

brn,

I got the title from the Inside Line article that I linked to, which was titled:

"GM Kills Next-Generation Tahoe and Suburban"

Those are full-size SUVs—hence the title of my blog. Now GM may well develop a larger car-based SUV from the Acadia, etc. platform, but the full-size SUVs that we all know and love/hate appears to be disappearing.

"The rest of the world gets along with a completely different lifestyle. We live in America. In this country, we are free to live the way we choose. Let's remember that."

Yup, a fatter and more wasteful/polluting lifestyle.
Ever checked out the obesity rates compared to any other economic power? Seems like the domestic auto industry reflects that. And now it's biting them in their super sized derrieres...

GM should just keep the Tahoe and Escalade only, and drop the Suburban/Yukon/Yukon XL/Escalade ESV. Face it, you don't see many of these models on the road anymore anyway. The most common is the Tahoe, and I love my Tahoe, and I will be sad to see them discontinue the entire full size suv segment because some people actually do need these vehicles.

Sure some people need them, but most, no matter what they think, do not.
There's a HUGE reason that the US auto makers are facing bankruptcy. Here's a hint, think trucks.
Apparently being free to live the way we choose hasn't worked out so well now, has it?

Wrongo, desmolicious. It sounds like you've been listening and reading too much anti-capitalist propaganda.

The free market works out just fine when not micromanaged by people who think they know better.
We have tons of truck-type vehicles in this country because people wanted them. And it wasn't just GM, Ford, and Chrysler that were building them. Toyota, Nissan, Honda, BMW, etc. were too. Toyota's image is that of the company that can do no wrong, but most of their growth over the last few years has been from trucks. And now fewer people want trucks. So, what's happening? Automakers are drastically scaling back truck production and planning to ramp up production on more economical vehicles. The consumer gets what they want, because there are so many people and companies wanting to sell to them.

I was not interested in having a truck so I never participated in that crazy fad that persisted for so long. But just because it wasn't for me doesn't mean that others shouldn't have been able to make their own choices and accept the consequences, whether favorable or not. We write our own ticket and should accept responsibility for it.

Any attempt to manage or control peoples' choices will ultimately result in less choice for us all.
It is not up to a government bureaucracy, or some know-it-all president to dictate what they think we "need", or should have. If you want someone else to decide for you, then consider moving to a socialist country, or a dictatorship, instead of implying that choice needs to be taken away from the rest of us.

How am I be wrong? How have I been listening to anti-capitalistic propoganda? So you are telling me that the news that the Big 3 are going bankrupt is a lie?
It is EXACTLY freedom of choice which has caused the demise of the US auto industry and the truck markets. People are free to buy what they want. They chose not to buy trucks, and so GM/Ford/Chrysler are in a world of hurt.
How am I taking away your choice? The American public is doing that for you. Be mad at them, go and tell everyone they should be buying trucks!
I guess they are all socialists!
Wanna hear something funny? Sure you do. Guess what country is buying trucks like there is no tomorrow? Venezuela. Run by a dictator...

No, of course the Big 3 (or Big 2 1/2) are hurting - although they're not necessarily going to go bankrupt either, especially with the socialist bailout plan. Notice how more and more industries have been going to the government with their hands out and saying, "Where's mine?"? When the government gives away "free" money, there are always plenty of takers. But it is government policies that have screwed up the free market, and thus, these companies feel justified in requesting a bailout. And it is not the government's money; it is ours (taxpayers), at least the two thirds of us who still even pay taxes. With the federal cash register wide open, where and when does it end? Politicians generally don't care that all that deficit spending ultimately reduces the value of our money further.

If the Big 3 had been more forward thinking, and not put too many of their eggs into one basket (trucks), they wouldn't be hurting so much right now. They now are having to face the negative consequences of that strategy, after benefiting greatly in the boom years. It's too bad they seem now to have nothing to show for it. But that is what's causing their problems now -- not peoples' freedom of choice.

You just seem to be succumbing to too much doom and gloom, which is the mass news media's main product for sale.

If it wasn't for the 'socialist' bailout, the big 3 will be gone.
So do you want to be able to buy US made trucks or not? If you do, thank these 'socialist' policies cuz without them Ford, Chrysler and GM will be gone.
I agree with you in as much I think it stinks. They have gambled on their truck cash cows, made a ton of money when the going was good, and now want free money to help them out of their bind. If we left it to the capitalistic model, we would let them fail. But this failure is due to people's freedom of choice. People were free to buy what they want, and chose not to buy trucks. The Big 3's policy to focus on trucks left them with few alternatives to attract sales, hence the current dilemma.
There's only one 'winner' here, and it aint the govt, it aint the consumer, it aint the workers, it's the upper management that got insane salaries when the going was good. And now that they've messed up, they're gonna get help.
Same model as the banking mess, the profits (salary bonuses etc) stay private, the losses are a public burden.

We still have a while before these vehicles possibly get the axe... GM may change there mind. Remember when GM was going to "kill" the Zeta program? I think that consolidation is a better idea than discontinuation. While I think that alot of SUV buyers buy these for the "image", there are still people who actually use these vehicles as they were intended. That's why instead of ignoring people who will want a full-sized SUV, they should just keep either the Chevy or GMC versions. GM really doesn't need 4 nameplates for one basic design. The Escalade was all about image and could easily be dropped with the name migrated over to the Lambda design. Don't get me wrong, I think the Big Three should concentrate more on fuel efficient cars and crossovers but I think the full-size SUV market is still big enough to be a participant in.

"...the upper management that got insane salaries when the going was good"

It wasn't just when the going was good. Ford execs gave themselves millions in bonuses last year. I suspect they will this year as well.