Automotive

GM and Honda to co-develp SUV/CUV platform

  • Last Updated:
  • Sep 9th, 2020 8:11 am
14 replies
Sr. Member
User avatar
Nov 15, 2017
846 posts
643 upvotes
Cool, RFD can shit on them both at the same time.
Deal Guru
Dec 20, 2018
10120 posts
10230 upvotes
Well toyota did it with GM for years just a decade or two ago?

Remember the Pontiac vibe and the rebadged Geo's?
Deal Guru
Jul 7, 2017
10212 posts
5525 upvotes
SW corner of the cou…
StatsGuy wrote: Well toyota did it with GM for years just a decade or two ago?

Remember the Pontiac vibe and the rebadged Geo's?
True enough, NUMMI and all that. Then again, Toyota was clearly the better car back then (and still now). Honda appears to have slipped to the GM side of the design/quality/customer service spectrum.
I smile when I see container ships sailing past my house laden with stuff made in China
Deal Expert
User avatar
Apr 21, 2004
58648 posts
24637 upvotes
General Motors Will Engineer and Build Nikola’s Badger Pickup
The Detroit automaker's Ultium batteries and Hydrotec fuel-cell technology will go into the Nikola Badger in exchange for an 11 percent ownership stake.
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a3395 ... ev-pickup/


Thanks to the original founders of Tesla.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Oct 6, 2010
15881 posts
10565 upvotes
Toronto
alanbrenton wrote: General Motors Will Engineer and Build Nikola’s Badger Pickup
The Detroit automaker's Ultium batteries and Hydrotec fuel-cell technology will go into the Nikola Badger in exchange for an 11 percent ownership stake.
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a3395 ... ev-pickup/


Thanks to the original founders of Tesla.
This is an amazing looking vehicle.
DIY difficulty scale:
0-joke
10-no joke
Deal Expert
User avatar
Apr 21, 2004
58648 posts
24637 upvotes
koffey wrote: This is an amazing looking vehicle.
And with GM, it's going to become a reality.

Supercruise is one of the best ADAS out there.
Deal Expert
User avatar
May 22, 2005
21222 posts
6989 upvotes
GTA
alanbrenton wrote: And with GM, it's going to become a reality.

Supercruise is one of the best ADAS out there.
GM has a ton of very talented engineers, especially at their Markham Innovation HQ, focusing on software, safety and autonomy. Unfortunately, it is the traditional management that is holding them back. It's as if they almost learned something since their bailout.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Apr 21, 2004
58648 posts
24637 upvotes
coriolis wrote: GM has a ton of very talented engineers, especially at their Markham Innovation HQ, focusing on software, safety and autonomy. Unfortunately, it is the traditional management that is holding them back. It's as if they almost learned something since their bailout.
Also, I will look for the comment on insideevs but GM is putting its eggs on different baskets: Honda, Peugeot, Cruise, Lyft, etc. And now Nikola.

The CEO is using her smarts.

Edit:

It was actually from C/D:

GM certainly has their hands in multiple cookie jars nowadays. They now own parts of Cruise, Lyft, Lordstown Motors, Nikola, and Peugeot. And they have a new alliance with Honda. You would think at least one of these ventures will pay off handsomely in the future. Don’t understand all the criticism, Mary Barra seems like a legit wheeler dealer.
Deal Guru
Dec 20, 2018
10120 posts
10230 upvotes
alanbrenton wrote: Also, I will look for the comment on insideevs but GM is putting its eggs on different baskets: Honda, Peugeot, Cruise, Lyft, etc. And now Nikola.

The CEO is using her smarts.

Edit:

It was actually from C/D:

GM certainly has their hands in multiple cookie jars nowadays. They now own parts of Cruise, Lyft, Lordstown Motors, Nikola, and Peugeot. And they have a new alliance with Honda. You would think at least one of these ventures will pay off handsomely in the future. Don’t understand all the criticism, Mary Barra seems like a legit wheeler dealer.
I don't know...wasn't that what ford did and failed spectacularly?

Having hands in multiple jars isn't necessarily good especially if they can't even get their core brands/products competitive

Other than corvette and maybe some of their pickups, GM is not really competitive or good in the segments their core brands are in?
Deal Addict
User avatar
Apr 22, 2013
3039 posts
2516 upvotes
Markham
StatsGuy wrote: I don't know...wasn't that what ford did and failed spectacularly?

Having hands in multiple jars isn't necessarily good especially if they can't even get their core brands/products competitive

Other than corvette and maybe some of their pickups, GM is not really competitive or good in the segments their core brands are in?
Actually it was what GM failed spectacularly at that. Ford at the very minimum managed to offload brands that weren't damaged goods. Aston Martin, Jaguar, Land Rover, Volvo, Mazda and Kia(the Ford Festiva is a Kia...) are all alive and well although Kia almost died, only brand Ford sacrificed was Mercury but that was its own brand. Ford ownership appears to be amicable even if they fail, the brand is given in a state where they have a chance to succeed.

Contrast to GM, Isuzu no longer makes cars, Suzuki isn't in any large car markets except India, Saab is dead, Daewoo had to be merged into GM. While its recent house brands that are dead are Hummer, Saturn, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Holden are gone. So contrast to Ford, when GM owned your brand it seems you struggle in the future. The only brand that didn't suffer under their hold was Subaru...but much like how I feel about a lot of GM's acquisitions past and present, I don't understand why it ever had a stake in Subaru and clearly did literally nothing with it as the only evidence it was ever a thing was that Saab 9-2X...which for Subaru was the best thing. Toyota's stake in Subaru however made total sense, they were interested in the battery technology from Subaru's parent company FHI while the excess production availability at Subaru's US plant now allowed to build Camrys was a bonus. Subaru got a benefit from Toyota in offloading those keicars which I think Subaru deep down hated building, while Toyota's Daihatsu division rebadges those as Subarus to help to comply with Japanese regulations.

Nothing wrong with automakers working together or having stake in one another. However when it doesn't seem to have a purpose...that's when things always go wrong.
- Jegan V
Deal Guru
Jul 7, 2017
10212 posts
5525 upvotes
SW corner of the cou…
StatsGuy wrote: I don't know...wasn't that what ford did and failed spectacularly
Ford bought Aston-Martin, Jaguar, Land Rover and Volvo. Didn't do it any good but at least got out of them and didn't go bankrupt like GM and Chrysler. GM has had its hands in many pots before such as bought a stake in Suzuki. Best one was buying the right to buy FIAT and also the right for FIAT to sell itself to GM, and then paying FIAT not to sell itself to GM. I think the r/t costs something like $4 bn.
I smile when I see container ships sailing past my house laden with stuff made in China
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Oct 12, 2007
9732 posts
9502 upvotes
Winchester
Car manufacturers co-develop and share components and tech all the time. This is just a memorandum of understanding and something or nothing might come of it. Not a big story but why waste an opportunity to walk down memory lane and reinterpret history?
Upvoting respectful and helpful RFDers since 2007
Deal Expert
User avatar
Oct 6, 2010
15881 posts
10565 upvotes
Toronto
coriolis wrote: GM has a ton of very talented engineers, especially at their Markham Innovation HQ, focusing on software, safety and autonomy. Unfortunately, it is the traditional management that is holding them back. It's as if they almost learned something since their bailout.
I would agree. Very innovative. Some folks, martin the deal addict for example, think otherwise simply because it's GM.

lol
DIY difficulty scale:
0-joke
10-no joke

Top