Filed under: Trends, SUVs, Wagons/Estates, Crossovers/CUVs, GM
What's in a name? GM wrestles with crossover designation
GM is apparently just as confused as the rest of us when it comes to naming that crossover/CUV/sport wagon/tall-wagon-thingy sitting in the driveway. In general, a crossover is a unibody vehicle that looks like an SUV, but handles and gets fuel mileage more like a car. SUVs are body-on-frame vehicles, generally built on a truck platform. The differences are sometimes minute, but that is only part of the problem. The bigger problem here is what to call this segment as a whole.
In the early days of SUVs, some people called all of them Jeeps. They were trucks for passenger vehicle duty, exemplified by the Jeep Cherokee. As more manufacturers started offering them, a slew of nicknames popped up to represent the segment, but SUV ended up being the one that stuck. Despite the fact that "sport" more often refers to what you can do with the stuff you are hauling, rather than how the thing drives.
So now we are faced with a similar dilemma in the emerging crossover category. GM ad execs are trying to figure out the best way to pitch their new entries in the field. GM has three new crossovers (the Saturn Outlook, GMC Acadia and Buick Enclave) coming out at the end of the year that they are not sure how to label. "We changed the SRX advertising for Cadillac earlier this summer to call it a crossover," Mike Jackson, GM North America's vice president of marketing and advertising, said in an interview with Automotive News.
Read on for more after the jump...
[Source: Autoweek]
But they aren't sure if that label will work for the others as they may be positioned differently by each brand. Gary Topolewski, a Detroit marketing and creative consultant, said: "'Crossover' is an internal term that everyone in Detroit understands. But around the nation, people ask, 'Is it an SUV or a truck or station wagon?'"
Chrysler faced a similar problem when it launched its Pacifica a few years ago. Topolewski, who used to be chief creative officer at Chrysler's advertising agency, BBDO, worked on Pacifica marketing. He remembers that they wanted to get away from the term "SUV" because they felt the term was "tired and old." His argument was that the vehicle was so different, Chrysler should bill it as "having redefined the SUV." That it did, paving the way for such diverse vehicles as the uber-wagon M-B R-Class and the zoom-zoomy Mazda5 nanovan. We're not sure which label will become THE one label for the segment, but we wouldn't mind hearing your suggestions in the comments.
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Eric 4:30PM (10/13/2006)
The Jeep Cherokee is actually a unibody vehicle.
Reply
Jason 4:34PM (10/13/2006)
Nice parts bin Envoy rims.
Reply
Jason 4:35PM (10/13/2006)
If even GM, the creator of this vehicle, is confused, you can bet the general public is going to be confused too. People want to relate and understand what they buy, not fall into guesswork and "what is it" gray areas. That's an uneasy feeling that will turn people away. Americans like security. This whole article is about insecurity.
Reply
Howard Kerr 4:51PM (10/13/2006)
Call it a Sports Activity Vehicle (SAV). That designation is bound to get ALL those customers who buy this sort of vehicle in the (often mistaken) belief they are getting a SAFE/SAV means of transporting their 2.1 children, dog or cat and soccer ball.
Reply
? 4:57PM (10/13/2006)
Here's the deal: let's go back 30 years, and call things what they really were(originally) called:
1) Truck: either with a full overed back, to haul people, or open back, to haul lumber: a truck was a truck, and not a "Sport-Truck" .
2) Crossovers: Let's call em what they are, STATION WAGONS(that pretned to be trucks).
3) Any coupe/3 door hatch, thant handles fast, good mpg, etc... Sporty car(unless rwd, then sports car).
4) Car: anything looks liek a fusion, sonata, and so forth.
If it has 5 doors, and waogn looks, call it a station wagon.
Reply
DCWF 5:00PM (10/13/2006)
As seen recently on a bumper sticker: “My Jeep is not an SUV, and your SUV is not a Jeep.”
For almost 10 years the Subaru Outback was just an Outback. It is only recently that Subaru has had to explain itself. I think manufacturers are making it harder than it has to be. Just design a vehicle, and sell it for what it is. I don’t need to be told what the category for a particular vehicle is; rather, I need to know the vehicle’s specs, how it handles, and the purpose for which I want to use it. After that, it’s just a matter of my own priorities and trade-offs. Incidentally, as of 2005, the Subaru Outback is considered a “light truck” for EPA purposes – now I get it!
Reply
Eric L. 5:06PM (10/13/2006)
I vote for CROSSOVER SPORT VAN. What? Its already taken? Noooooooo!!!!! =D
Reply
andybee 5:11PM (10/13/2006)
CRAP - Crossover Recreational Automobile Projectile
Reply
Keith 5:24PM (10/13/2006)
I think the reason why they are confused is because today so many "SUVs" are really not SUVs and fall into the category of crossover, at least in my mind.
A SUV has higher ground clearance, higher seating position, and higher payload/towing capacity then a car.
A Wagon has the same ground clearance, same seating position, and same payload/towing capacity as a car.
A Crossover is not an SUV when it shares one of those three attributes with a car, and a crossover is not a wagon when it shares one of those three attributes with an SUV.
An Audi All Road is not an SUV because it shares the same seating position as a car, but isn't a wagon because of the higher ground clearance.
A Ford Freestyle is not an SUV because it doesn't have higher payload/towing capacity. A Ford Freestyle is not a Wagon because it has a higher seating position.
I don't know, haven't thought about it much. I'm just shooting from the hip what I think a crossover is.
Reply
That One Person 5:24PM (10/13/2006)
Its a damn wagon!!!!
Reply
Fabulo 5:51PM (10/13/2006)
"Minivan without the sliding doors"
"The new hip soccermon vehicle"
"Rounded corner-raked windshield suv looking vehicle"
"You thought the gas mileage was better but you get 16MPG"
Reply
Michael Karesh 5:54PM (10/13/2006)
These appear to blur the lines more than the Freestyle and Pacifica because they have a more SUV-like stance, with a lot of height and a good amount of air between the tops of the tires and the wheel openings. It's that air that generally separates an SUV from a crossover these days. They're not just wagons because they're much taller and larger.
Many SUVs are unibodies, including most from Jeep and Land Rover. That they are all BoF is a common misconception.
Ground clearance doesn't do it, because some crossovers like the Subarus have more of it than some SUVs.
The major demarcation is probably whether a two-speed transfer case is AVAILABLE. But then someone will fit a crossover with one of those just for grins. Also, this would make the new Dodge Nitro a crossover, when it looks and behaves like an SUV, just without the off-road ability of one.
They'll probably all just be SUVs in the end, because there are no clear lines.
Reply
losburritos 6:08PM (10/13/2006)
They should jus name it what they feel would give them the least amount of trouble (EPA etc). I dont find SUV's attractive aside from the Nissan Murano primarily cuz I'm a car guy but hey, that horizontally supported front badge looks like a Honda or Acura. GM, get back to your fanbase (not me) designs.
Reply
jim 6:26PM (10/13/2006)
Jeep invented the term SUV...I remember it well...with the cherokee as an attempt to make up for it's (then small) size, then came the s-10 blazers which everyone started calling SUV's, then GM later started calling their suburbans SUVS and everybody laughed at the stupid marketers at GM.
Now who exactly says that SUV's are truck on frame?
Reply
grand cherokee and explorer owner 6:35PM (10/13/2006)
These have alread aquired a nickmane by real offroaders. They call them "poser" or "nerd buggy".
Reply
Corey W. 7:16PM (10/13/2006)
It's not about GM's insecurity, it's about marketing finding the best way to advertise the vehicle to the public.
You guys are making this too hard, this is from a previous post but I guess it loosely applies to this post also. IMO, there is only three basic classes of vehicle, MOTORCYCLE, TRUCK and CAR. If you're based off a truck platform, you're a TRUCK, everything else is a CAR. You can get as detailed as you want, hatchback, sedan, coupe, wagon, sports, small suv....etc. It's still a CAR. You don't see too many body on frame cars out there today, this is mostly for trucks, because it's a more heavy duty, durable architecture. You got a unibody SUV?!?! What you got is a really big CAR.... Most cars today are of unibody construction. Now if you're on your own distinct platform that gives equal or substantial functionality of both CAR and TRUCK, then you're a HYBRID.
An example of "equal" or "substantial" would be... let say an El Camino...it can only be considered a CAR, although it has a pickup truck bed, it's not substantial enough to be consider a HYBRID. Same is the case with the X3 and X5, they are CARS with an offroad/SUV look.
All that crap in between, SUV, CUV, Offroad, Crossover.... is all MARKETING!!
GM just needs to figure out what term will give the consumer the warm and fuzzy when they see the vehicle.
Reply
David 7:39PM (10/13/2006)
Jeep, like Kleenex, is a brand name (and registered trademark) that people often misuse as a general term for what they think it represents. Jeep may have in fact "invented" the SUV, but that doesn't make any SUV a Jeep.
As the first commenter mentioned, the most recent Jeep Cherokee (XJ), all Grand Cherokees, and the Commander are all unibody vehicles. I don't think the body-on-frame definition holds for SUVs.
Also, it really doesn't (shouldn't) matter what companies call their vehicles. SUV, as we all know, just stands for spurt utility vehicle. That could (and does) have so many meanings. You really only need to worry about the vehicle's capability and what you're going to use it for. Let GM call those things whatever they want. Styling and utility are what will make or break them.
The only really important definition is whether or not the vehicle is classified as a truck by the feds. This simply requires a flat load floor for cargo, and includes vehicles like the PT Cruiser. And that really only applies to the automakers themselves for things like CAFE.
Reply
solomonrex 10:15AM (10/14/2006)
What was wrong with the word, "Station Wagon"? NOTHING! All the major manufacturers need to get over their BABY BOOMER BIAS against station wagons. Ok, I don't care if it's tall, the Highlander is a Camry Wagon. The rest of this is just marketing crap and CAFE designations.
Reply
MikeW 11:59AM (10/14/2006)
Car is: unibody, rack and pinion steering, independent suspension.
Truck used to be: body on frame, NON rack and pinion, i.e. worm and sector, non independent suspension.
Although plenty of trucks are using rack and pinion steering and independent suspension, explorer/expedition.
Reply
Ben K. 5:00PM (10/14/2006)
I think the new crossovers from
I think the new crossovers from GM look good, but I agree they need a new category. Recreational Utility Vehicle would be appropriate, RUV. It's not a truck, van or wagon. It is a multi-purpose vehicle, MPV. Sport Utility Crossover, SUC. The possibilities are there, good luck.
Reply