Top 10 Modern Sales Failures Part I

A lot of research goes into making a car.   While something as straightforward as a Corvette seems like it would leap directly from a designer's pen to the production floor, there is marketing research and focus groups that work out the tiniest of details, from styling to ergonomics.  Most of the time, these techniques work well - if something does well in a focus group, chances are it'll do well on the market.

Sometimes it doesn't.  Maybe it's because management decided to ignore the focus groups, or got the wrong demographic, or changed the vehicle too much between research and production.  For whatever reason, sometimes even the best (or worst) laid plans result in an absolute stinker of a car, that dealers can't push off their lots with a backhoe.  Here are ten of them.  And no, I'm not biased against GM - they just seem especially good at this.

10) Chevrolet SSR

Please leave, you're scaring the kids

Sometimes, "niche" vehicles end up working very well on the market.  Offer something that's truly unique, or a combination of two things that hasn't been seen before, and some people are going to want it.  Some times, though, it's a drunken belly-flop.  Case in point: the Chevrolet SSR.

I'm not lambasting the SSR's styling, actually.  I've always thought it was a pretty cool-looking vehicle, especially when it's lowered a bit from the stock Z71-esque ride height.  But it was the peanut butter-salmon-pickle sandwich of the automotive world.  A combination of pickup truck, sports car, and convertible, it didn't do any of those things well.

The SSR was based on a shortened GMT-360 chassis, which was the same frame that underpinned sporty vehicles such as the Chevrolet Trailblazer, GMC Envoy, and the Oldsmobile Bravada.  (Also the Buick Rainier, Isuzu Ascender, Saab 9-7x, and I might be forgetting some.)  Obviously when you set out to make a sports car, starting with a competitor for the Ford Explorer is somewhat counter-intuitive.

"How about some ghost flames?  Is that better?"  "...No."

The concept car was based on the significantly smaller S-10 pickup truck, which made some sense.  But by the time 2003 rolled around, the S10 was long gone, so the 360 it was.  The design brief called for a folding metal hardtop and a pickup bed with a hard tonneau cover.  Result: a vehicle based on a fairly spacious SUV, with two seats and barely enough space for the passengers that were supposed to fit in them, thanks to the room taken up by the top mechanism, and the pickup bed.  Seriously uncomfortable car unless you have a pathological obsession with rubbing elbows with your passenger - somewhat confusing.

More bad news?  The 2003-2004 SSR was powered by GM's 5.3L Vortec V8.  While 5.3L sounds like a fairly large engine, this iron-block truck engine cranked out 300bhp and 335lb-ft of torque.  Mated exclusively to a 4-speed automatic transmission, the hot-rod looking SSR would sprint to 60 in a blistering... oh.  7.8 seconds.  Which is pretty fast by 80's standards, but pretty embarrassing when your hot-rod pickup truck convertible sports car routinely gets dusted off traffic lights by things like Honda Accord V6's.

Then there was the price: at $42,000 and change, it was terribly close to Corvette money.  Which was actually quite fast, and handled well, and wasn't so... odd looking.  The situation got better in 2005, when the Vortec was ditched for the new 6.0L LS2 V8 shared with the Corvette, offering a more useful 390 horsepower, as well as the option of a Tremec 6-speed manual transmission.  Still, they sat on dealer lots like they were welded to the ground.  GM discontinued the SSR in 2006, with just over 24,000 units sold in total.  They closed down the Lansing Craft Centre (where the SSR was built) after the SSR went out of production - perhaps out of shame.

9) Kia Borrego

"What is that?  A Grand Cherokee?"  - everyone

A simple recipe, the Kia Borrego.  Tough body-on-frame construction, great for towing and off-roading.  A big V6 (3.8L) or an optional bigger V8 (4.6L, the 32v Tau V8 that original debuted in the Hyundai Genesis luxury sedan) that made plenty of power and torque.  A two speed transfer case with a "creeper" gear for off-road usage, adjustable air suspension, even hill descent control.  A roomy cabin for seven passengers, chunky "macho" styling - what's the problem?

Well, this would've been a recipe for success in 1998, when the SUV trend was in full swing.  This was back in the prime of Isuzu and Mitsubishi, when they were still slinging Monteros and Troopers by the dozen.  People wanted rough-and-tumble SUV's that could actually do shit.  They wanted a truck with some extra body that could tow 7,500lbs (even if they never did.)  They bought those Z71 package Tahoes because they looked cool.  If the Borrego had come out even in the early 2000's, it probably would've been one of the best-selling real SUV's.  Why not?  It had all of the things those buyers were looking for.

By 2008 though, it was a case of great landing, wrong airport.  Not a whole lot of people were interested in a body-on-frame SUV with a gas-sucking V8 that didn't ride like a car.  The RX300 had marched in and stole the SUV show more than a decade prior, proving that SUV buyers really just wanted to look tough, not actually be tough.  So despite attractive pricing, pretty decent styling (in my opinion), and a lot of capability, the Borrego sold like ice to Eskimos.  Yearly sales were predicted to top 20,000 units, but Kia moved less than half that many in 2009, it's first (and only) full year of production.  They sold less than a thousand of them in November of '09, which doesn't seem that bad - until you consider that Chevy sold almost 6,800 Tahoes that month.  Ford sold more Explorers (4,400) even though they were end-of-the-line body on frame Explorers.

So the lesson here is, even if you sell a rough-and-tumble body on frame V8 SUV that's really nice, launching it during an economic downtown and a spike in gas prices is usually a recipe for disaster.

8) Jaguar X-Type

Oh lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes-Benz, if I drive an X-Type, I'll have no friends.

Now, I'm only talking about the US here.  I don't know how well the Jaguar X-Type did over in Europe, but the Top Gear boys seemed relatively fond of it.  In the US at least, the X-Type earned the unfortunate nickname of "The British Cimarron."  Jaguar was reaching out to the "affluent young professional" market, and they were all too busy driving 325i's to even notice.  How rude!

It didn't help that the X-Type was based in part on the European MkII Ford Mondeo chassis.  Not that there was any actual way to tell from looking at it, sitting in it, or driving it - well, besides the cramped rear seat.  But when word got out that the X-Type was "A Mondeo in drag!" (regardless of how little they actually shared), people found it even harder to take the X-Type seriously.

How did Jaguar differentiate the X-Type from the Mondeo?  Initially, it was only offered with gas V6's (a 2.5L with 197bhp, and a 3.0L with 228) and a simple all-wheel-drive system.  I rode in a 3.0L 5-speed manual X-Type once (which apparently was a pretty rare car), and it was actually pretty nice.  However, the growth of the model line - downwards - probably didn't help the car's image.  In Europe, the X-Type was also available with a 2.1L V6 that coughed out 154 horsepower as well.  The introduction of a 2.0L diesel model with front-wheel-drive in 2003 probably had a few people scratching their heads.  A 2.0L 128 horsepower diesel front wheel drive Jaguar?

That sound is Sir William Lyons spinning at 9,000rpm in his grave.

The wagon version in 2004 might have been a step too far.  They tried to sell it in the US from 2005-2008; it's said that around 1,600 of them - total - were sold here.  Which is a shame; even though a Jag wagon is a bit weird, it was better looking than the sedan.  Sedan sales themselves were pretty bad, too - Jaguar's initial prediction for the X-Type was 100,000 units globally, but it only ever hit about half that in it's best year (2003.)  In 2005, Jaguar sold just over 10k X-Types; BMW sold about 10 times that many 3-series.  Proof that people with enough money to buy luxury cars didn't get rich by being foolish enough to buy one like an X-Type.

7) GMC Envoy XUV

Not pictured: reality.

This one was a real head scratcher.  Kudos to GM for thinking outside of the box, but generally a product should have an intended purpose that makes some kind of sense.  This was lacking with the XUV, which was supposed to be a combination of pickup truck and SUV.  Based on the long-wheelbase GMC Envoy XL (GMT-360), the XUV had sliding panels on the rearmost part of the roof, a rear window that retracted, and a removable "mid-gate" section behind the rear seats, like the Chevy Avalanche.    With the roof retracted and the window down, it was just like a pickup truck!  And with it closed, it was just like an SUV!

It seemed like the XUV was designed for the Grandfather Clock service industry, because the short pickup bed with unlimited height wasn't useful for carrying much of anything else.  At least the bed area was plastic with drainage holes.  Bob Lutz himself said the XUV program cost $275 million to develop, so this was not a cheap addition.  GMC was estimating that 30,000 Grandfather Clock repairmen per year would want to buy an XUV, but it turned out only 12,000 people signed a check for one in it's only year of production (2004.)   GM cancelled the model the next year, and Grandfather Clock repairmen have been lamenting it's loss ever since.

6) Volkswagen Phaeton

It's almost physically painful for me to include this, because I love the Phaeton.

"Pride cometh before the fall," or so the saying goes.  The Volkswagen Phaeton was a the most obvious result of Ferdinand Piech's (then-CEO of VW) desire to turn Volkswagen into a premium brand.  Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of the German language is aware of how ironic a brand called "the people's car" moving into the luxury market is - or at least, anyone but Ferdinand Piech.

Not to fault the Phaeton on it's quality, design, or styling traits - it was surely a match for rivals such as the S-class Mercedes, 7-series BMW, and- ironically - it's big brother, the Audi A8.  Although the Phaeton had similar dimensions to the 3rd-generation Audi A8 (D3), it was actually based on the steel D1 chassis, which was designed specifically for the Phaeton- and the Bentley Continental.

The Phaeton was a ridiculously over-engineered car.  One of the more well-known tidbits about the Phaeton's development: it was supposed to be able to drive all day at 186mph, while maintaining an inside temperature of 72°F with an outside ambient temperature of 122°F.  And while that is a ridiculous, impossible scenario, what's even funnier is that all Phaetons were restricted to 155mph!

The Phaeton was sold in a lot of markets as a competitor for the S-Class Mercedes (with the A8 being more of a rival to the 7-series) with a variety of engines.  Europeans had a choice of a 3.2L VR6 (shared with the MkIV Golf R32, oddly enough) as well as a 3.0L V6 TDI and 5.0L V10 TDI.  The only engine options in the US were Audi's excellent 4.2L 32v V8 (as seen in the S4, A6, A8, etc) and - very rarely - a 6.0L W12, the same basic engine as the Continental GT, but without the turbochargers.  The car had an exquisitely designed interior with all the modern luxury trappings, standard all-wheel-drive, etc.

This all-wheel-drive luxury car has a twin-turbo V10 diesel with 553lb-ft of torque; why get hung up on a badge?

It was also a great-looking car, subdued but still obviously quite special.  So what was the problem?  Well, it had a giant Volkswagen badge on the front and the back, and a sticker price of nearly $65,000 when new.  So regardless of the car's merits, people with 65k to spend on a luxury sedan didn't really want to be driving the "people's car."  Or getting their $65,000 luxury sedan serviced at the same dealers that still can't figure out how much oil goes into a New Beetle 1.8T.  It was an image issue.  So many people balked at that price tag: "$65,000 for a Volkswagen?  Are they crazy?  I would never pay that much for a VW."  Regardless of the fact that it was a freaking Bentley Continental underneath, and showed a level of overengineering not seen since W123 Benzes.

How dismal of a sales failure was it?  Well, not that dismal in it's home market, where people put more value on how nice the car is, and less value on what badge is on the hood.  But the plant made specifically to produce Phaetons (in Dresden) had a total yearly capacity of 20,000 units; VW ended up making about 25,000 between 2002-2006, with annual production closer to 6,000.  In the US, the Phaeton was an even bigger flop in it's two years.  In it's first year (2004), VW dealers managed to shift 1,433.  Which is pretty bad.  In 2005, they sold 820.  All year.  Across the whole country.  That is sub-Maserati sales figures.  Those sales figures would make Saab dealers cringe.  Understandably, VW decided to pull the Phaeton from the market.  You know how you can tell the Phaeton was awesome despite it's sales figures?  Jack Baruth had two.  Two.

I'll continue with the other five sales failures in part II of this article, so stay tuned.