Citroen channeling 2CV reincarnation

[motec 6.9]

Citroen is planning a new city car and has teased pictures before its release claiming to be a reincarnation of the 2CV https://www.carsales.com.au/editorial/details/citroen-city-car-concept-teased-ahead-of-geneva-116937

 

[c107]

I don't think PSA know what they want out of the Citroen brand. Reminds me of GM before their big rationalization. They've split out the 'DS' brand and i'm not sure what Citroen represents anymore.

It's a bit like GM forgot what Buick, Oldsmobile, Pontiac etc all represented and over time lost all their customers.

 

[Michel]

It's a bit like GM forgot what Buick, Oldsmobile, Pontiac etc all represented and over time lost all their customers.

GM's distinctive brands were aimed at their own unique demographic.
Each brand had its speciality:

*Cadillac was the ultimate: Presidents (of any corporation) had them.
*Buick was for Vice-Presidents.
*Oldsmobile, although almost as luxurious as Buick, was the test mule for all new developments (first front wheel drive, first diesel, etc...
*Pontiac was the performance test bed: GTO - Transam, and
*Chevrolet, well that was the working man's car. Everyone in America owned a Chevy at some stage.

But what killed some of GM's brands and other brands in the Big Three was the arrival of serious competition from decent cars (albeit small) from Japan and then, the revival of the Europeans who started building better and better cars at affordable prices.

The Americans, who used to make the most amazing and beautiful cars suddenly lost their touch and began producing ugly models that ran bad and stopped appealing to the buying public, sending GM into bankruptcy.

 

[c107]

GM's distinctive brands were aimed at their own unique demographic.
Each brand had its speciality:

*Cadillac was the ultimate: Presidents (of any corporation) had them.
*Buick was for Vice-Presidents.
*Oldsmobile, although almost as luxurious as Buick, was the test mule for all new developments (first front wheel drive, first diesel, etc...
*Pontiac was the performance test bed: GTO - Transam, and
*Chevrolet, well that was the working man's car. Everyone in America owned a Chevy at some stage.

But what killed some of GM's brands and other brands in the Big Three was the arrival of serious competition from decent cars (albeit small) from Japan and then, the revival of the Europeans who started building better and better cars at affordable prices.

The Americans, who used to make the most amazing and beautiful cars suddenly lost their touch and began producing ugly models that ran bad and stopped appealing to the buying public, sending GM into bankruptcy.

I think that is all true in their heydey, but by the time I was living in the USA, a pontiac was a Chevy with bad plastic cladding and no hint of peformance, a Buick a Chevy with better seats, olds was offering bland offerings without a hint of the new tech they had once promised. Even Caddie was appealing only to octogenarians living in florida.

and then of course came the competition as you mention. But I still think GM forgot what their brands were all about as they become run by accountants and not product people.

 

[Michel]

But I still think GM forgot what their brands were all about as they become run by accountants and not product people.

Oh So True...

 

[sean sherry]

Nothing new in Accountants being let loose. Hark back to Mercedes a few short years ago. A brand name eroded is a hard road back.. if ever.

 

[motec 6.9]

Very true and the style imposed upon the public after about 73 . Was horrendous mainly with US safety' bumper bars. Almost no US car was attractive after 73. And those that were . Started model cycle before then. Until Chrysler got there design mojo in late 80's early 90's . I think only decent looking US cars were 2nd Gen Camaro and Firebird plus C3 then C4 Corvette. And the pickups which the US has always done well. Everything else for about a 20 year window was very blah.

 

[SEL_69L]

The only way a modern car manufacturer can make their top luxury models to be so, is to have obviously high build quality, with current state of the art recognized exotic materials. That makes their products more costly to build, but that is OK, if you have a customer base to support this build quality policy. Mercedes in that era ad such a customer base.

To regain some of that reputation I think Mercedes could spend a lot more research and development funds to test car electronics to destruction in a much wider range of environments. That way their such top end luxury cars would bee seen much more reliable than they are now, with far fewer maintenance costs. The the customer base could see them as 'bullet proof', such luxury cars would retain much higher prices, as they age.
The dichotomy in this for any car maker however, is such cars when new would be so highly priced, as to be uncompetitive in the new car market, where profits have to be made.

The Lexus LS 400 is seen to be well engineered, ('bullet proof'), and was marketed at the time to compete with Mercedes in World markets. Today, the electronics of this car are still reasonably reliable. So is that rather nice 4 liter V8 engine, if it has been well serviced.

Mercedes had problems with wiring looms, and BMW had i Drive problems.