2013 Audi A3

Bob Lutz calls for crash-test freeze to aid small-car production

 
10 1,985 views Sep 3, 2008
Follow Nelson

Bob Lutz calls for crash-test freeze to aid small-car production

Bob Lutz calls for crash-test freeze to aid small-car production

Enlarge Photo
A number of small and fuel-efficient cars in General Motors' global portfolio, such as the Chevrolet Beat (concept pictured), are being kept from U.S. sale because of differences in the official crash test procedures to those in Europe and elsewhere. Bob Lutz, GM's vice chairman and chief of product development, thinks a three-year freeze on crash test requirements would help get those vehicles to market and improve fuel economy while other, longer-term solutions are developed.

Lutz isn't afraid to couch the whole assertion in plain business terms, neglecting the safety issue entirely. “In Europe, the crash-test procedures are different than in the U.S., so the tests are different. If our government says cars that meet crash tests in other countries are good enough to be sold here, we would have more high-mileage, small-car flexibility,” he said in an interview with Wards Auto.

Already the car industry is lobbying heavily for a $50 billion low-interest loan package to be funded by the taxpayers, so the addition of the request for relaxed or suspended safety testing might be taken as adding injury to insult. Nevertheless, the tough march toward 35mpg (6.7L/100km) fuel efficiency standards is already exacting a heavy cost within the industry, and at GM in particular as the SUV and pickup-truck-heavy lineup that sold so well in recent years now faces a buying public that wants smaller cars and state governments that want lower emissions.

The Chevy Beat, designed and built by Daewoo for the global non-U.S. market, would be ideal if only it could meet safety standards. Unfortunately all the fresh looks and low fuel consumption in the world don't add up to a chassis that was not designed to meet U.S. testing in the first place. Lutz has previously commented that it would take a complete redesign to make the car salable in America with the present safety standards, and that won't do any good for keeping costs down or getting cars to market more quickly.

The Cruze, which was designed from the start for U.S. sale, has been pushed through the design and development process at an accelerated rate, but its still not expected to make landfall in the U.S. until 2011 despite its 2009 debut for Europe. Until then the Cobalt, Aveo and a handful of other small and medium-sized vehicles will have to carry GM's fuel efficiency banner.



Tags:
Posted in:
 
Contribute
Send us a tip Comment Contact the editor
Follow Us

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

  • Posting indicates you have read this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
  • Notify me when there are more comments
Comments (10)

  1. By Cire Posted: 9/3/2008 11:33am PDT

    Right, let's compromise everyone's safety because GM can't get their act together. Why didn't they engineer these vehicles to meet U.S. regulations? It's not like the government concealed these regulations from GM in an effort to sabotage them. I used to have a lot of respect for Bob Lutz, but that respect diminishes every time he spews stupidity such as this. If the government agrees to this, they should attach a condition that Mr. Lutz and his beloved family members drive one of these safety challenged small vehicles to work each day on the most semi infested routes. I'm sure his views on this issue would change drastically.

    Regardless of my feelings towards Toyota or Honda, you don't hear about them asking our government to disregard our safety to help them sidestep their inability to develop products that align with current market conditions. Does Mr. Lutz realize how bad he has made GM look with his ridiculous and foolish statement. People who are already wary of GM will definitely be put off by this current round of stupidity. The statement makes GM look like they don't really care about their customers' safety as much as they care about making money. This comment ranks up there with Bobby's other public blunder about denying global warming. Here GM was with the most enviromentally careless image in the auto market (whether it was rightfully earned or not) and they have Bob Lutz shooting off his mouth about how global warming was a myth. Regardless of how true or false his beliefs were on this issue, didn't he have enough sense to realize what a public relations disaster this was for the corporation. GM needs to make sure that "Maximum Bob" takes his medication before he makes any public statements. The corporation already has the press on their backs, ready to pounce on any of the corporation's errors or failures. They don't need any additional PR headaches created by an arrogant and egotistical loose canon who doesn't seem smart enough to know when to keep his mouth shut.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  2. By Renton Posted: 9/3/2008 11:46am PDT

    US regulations are too strict and many are absolutely uneeccessary. Yu survide the 70's and 8o's right? The 90's? Hoe much safde do we need.? Cars are heavier now than they were 15 years ago, they should be lighter.

    Our own gov't regs have a lot to blame for our current problems. Fuel regs, drilling restrictions, diesel pollution standards, and yes safety standrds keep good products from entering our country.

    We need to put a moratorium and soem of these regs and move forward with getting efficient transportation on the road.

    Cire -- you need to get rid of teh "OMG...what about our children " mentality and realize that these cars are safe and more regs are only holding us back. The gov't is retarde and the our lawmakers are not engineers. They are a-holes for the most part.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  3. By Renton Posted: 9/3/2008 11:47am PDT

    Man.... try to disregard the typos.....shiat!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  4. By www.mywheelsonwalls.com Posted: 9/3/2008 12:03pm PDT

    Does Uncle Bob realise that European crash standards are much tougher than the U.S.? If Mercedes can get the Smart in without any wrangling why cant GM get what is a limo in comparison through testing?
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  5. By Laz Posted: 9/3/2008 12:05pm PDT

    Why is "Overkill" on government safety regulations a bad thing? If cars are heavier now than what they were 15 years ago, then I think the auto makers should take a proactive step on using lighter materials and better engineering. I really think it's funny to think of any auto maker as a victim.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  6. By c__ Posted: 9/3/2008 12:06pm PDT

    make crash test stricter this is 2008 forget gm
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  7. By www.mywheelsonwalls.com Posted: 9/3/2008 12:14pm PDT

    If Uncle Bobby was in the plane business do you think he would make them without landing gear?

    A: It would be a savings in having to not engineer/make one less item

    B: He has proof that you dont need landing gear to land a plane anyway!

    Just a thought!!!!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  8. By JSH Posted: 9/3/2008 12:37pm PDT

    Lutz is coming at this from the wrong angle and one that has the potential to damage GM. By calling for a freeze in crash standards he gives the impression that GM doesn't care about safety. At the current rate that GM is losing market share, he can't afford to alienate any part of the buying public and safety is a top issue for many buyers.

    He is right that it is crazy to have essentially 4 crash standards: EU, US, Japan, ROW (Rest of World). What he should be calling for is a global automotive crash standard that is negotiated at the WTO level. While he's at it, a global emission standard would be nice too. Of course that will happen about the same time that the US converts to the SI units and drops our antiquated "English" units of measure.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  9. By Don Posted: 9/7/2008 8:10pm PDT

    Gotta love Maximum Bob...breaking the rules because his company can't compete!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  10. By saabfan Posted: 9/8/2008 2:39pm PDT

    where you are today has to do a lot with the decision you have made many years ago. The big three got arrogant and complacent without plan B. These execs are some of the most highly paid individual in corporate America and this is the only thing that they can come up with. Waaaaaah....waaaaah.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

Connect with Facebook

Motor Authority. Now with your friends.

Discover stories your friends read.
Share stories more easily.
You control what you share.
Learn more

Research New Cars

Go!


More from High Gear Media

 
 
MotorAuthority
  • Follow Us
  • Twiiter
  • Facebook
 
 
© 2011 MotorAuthority. All Rights Reserved. MotorAuthority is published by High Gear Media. Stock photography by Homestar, LLC. Send us feedback.