Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Volkswagen Isn't Planning to Send the Polo to the U.S.

      Those hoping for Volkswagen's subcompact to arrive in the U.S. will be disappointed by this news.

    There was talk a few years back about Volkswagen possibly sending over the next-generation Polo over to the U.S. But it seems those plans have been scrapped.

    Speaking with Automotive News at the launch of the sixth-generation Polo, Volkswagen global sales boss, Juergen Stackmann said it doesn't make sense for the automaker to bring it over.

    "It doesn't make too much sense for us to bring a car like this, which has the substance of a class higher, into a segment that is so price driven in America," said Stackmann.

    Subcompacts are sold in North America mostly on price and high fuel economy figures. In Europe, it is a different story. While price is one key factor for buyers of subcompacts, they are also looking for something that is easy to maneuver in cities and doesn't hurt the wallet when it comes to registering. Buyers in Europe also tend to buy features you would find in bigger vehicles such as adaptive cruise control.

    If Volkswagen was to bring the Polo over, it would cost significantly more than its key rivals.  

    For the timebeing, Volkswagen will focus on two segments in the U.S. - SUVs and sedans.

    "Our strategy for the U.S. will be SUV driven with the Atlas and Tiguan and there are two more coming. And we will also have sedans. That means we will compete in the segments that really make volume and business sense in the U.S."

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Kinda sad....I did like the idea of it coming over....as it always had a classic look and was nice to drive.

    That said, wouldn't make sense to have a Polo starting near 20 grand here either.....

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, duh. There was never any REAL danger of this making it to our market. 

    And sadly, it's probably for the best. As much as I'd love a Polo GTI, there would be to much overlap with the Golf, and the sales numbers probably wouldn't support it. Also, VW NA has shown themselves to be incredibly incompetent at figuring out what trim levels to build, how to equip and price them, etc, etc. They're about to bring out a brand-new Tiguan that even in 38K SEL Premium form won't have ventilated seats. So dumb. Takes it off my potential list of vehicles to replace my wife's Rav4. From what I can tell, the new Arteon won't offer them either.

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

    Well, duh. There was never any REAL danger of this making it to our market. 

    And sadly, it's probably for the best. As much as I'd love a Polo GTI, there would be to much overlap with the Golf, and the sales numbers probably wouldn't support it. Also, VW NA has shown themselves to be incredibly incompetent at figuring out what trim levels to build, how to equip and price them, etc, etc. They're about to bring out a brand-new Tiguan that even in 38K SEL Premium form won't have ventilated seats. So dumb. Takes it off my potential list of vehicles to replace my wife's Rav4. From what I can tell, the new Arteon won't offer them either.

    I love VW but they are very good at shooting themselves in the foot. Scirocco anyone?

    Edited by A Horse With No Name
    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    23 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

    Well, duh. There was never any REAL danger of this making it to our market. 

    And sadly, it's probably for the best. As much as I'd love a Polo GTI, there would be to much overlap with the Golf, and the sales numbers probably wouldn't support it. Also, VW NA has shown themselves to be incredibly incompetent at figuring out what trim levels to build, how to equip and price them, etc, etc. They're about to bring out a brand-new Tiguan that even in 38K SEL Premium form won't have ventilated seats. So dumb. Takes it off my potential list of vehicles to replace my wife's Rav4. From what I can tell, the new Arteon won't offer them either.

    2

    I wonder if that would be true a few years back where small vehicles were the rage. I would really like to have a Polo GTI since that is likely all of the vehicle I would need. But as you noted above (and I have bolded), this is one of the things that Volkswagen hasn't figured out and makes some of their vehicles less appealing to me. Hence, I'm ok we don't get the Polo.

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yeah, five years ago or so when the Fiesta, Sonic, Versa, Fit etc seemed to be The Next Big Thing, maybe.  Now, not so much..what they need for the US now is a small CUV, maybe Polo based..something below the Tiguan. (from the article it said 2 more are coming--the new Touareg and something below the Tiguan, perhaps? )

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    economic crash, manic tightening of FE regs, and expensive gas made compacts and subcompacts an option just a few years ago.

    Now, economy is decent, and gas is dirt cheap.

    Better to invest resources into keeping the Golf line viable.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • How did their engineers find a way to offer both with great space? It is a large 'engine bay'.  At this point, even if I said that 2 cu.ft is nonexistent, if the Audi could offer a frunk that size, Cadillac should have done the same.  I have realized that  people associate EVs with frunks and this is why you and I (and I think @David too) might criticize Cadillac for a missed opportunity with the Lyric.    Forget about Silverados and Hummers, they gave the mid-engine Corvette a trunk and frunk when a mid-engined supercar, even as a Corvette, could have forgone a frunk, but they KNEW it would benefit Corvette because people EXPECT storage space in a Corvette.    GM missed the part that people ALSO expect frunks in EVs...  ESPECIALLY in the market that the Lyriq resides in.  yeah......that would be the proper wording. Its not a big deal by ANY means.  Just disappointing. 
    • Thanks for the information. The Model X seems to have an abundance of space, everywhere.  The Lyriq just seems to have such a large "engine bay" that could/should still be able to have at least 2 cubic feet of space available. It isn't like their rear cargo space is THAT much larger than what they chose to compare it to.  It's a perfectly fine vehicle and the lack of a small frunk wouldn't stop me, it's just a little disappointing it doesn't have one when I feel like they could have engineered one in and still had a large boot. 
    • At 2.12 and 0.95 cu.ft for the Audi and Jag's frunk respectfully is a non-issue for the Lyriq not having a frunk. Maximizing the back trunk space as what the GM guys are saying for the Lyriq and the reason why they did it that way by-passing the need for a frunk sounds like marketing BS, until you realize that Audi and Jag's frunk space is nonexistent...   To which GM's words then kinda make sense as the Lyriq does in fact offer more room back there.   Frunk space is kinda expected though, for EVs, so there is that... Tesla Model X for a comparison as Tesla is the benchmark....   https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/modelx/en_us/GUID-91E5877F-3CD2-4B3B-B2B8-B5DB4A6C0A05.html     Cargo Volume Table 1. 5-Seater Cargo Volumes Area Volume (liters) Volume (cubic ft) Front trunk 183 6.5 Behind first row, second row folded flat 2,410 85.1 Behind second row 1,050 37.1 Maximum total cargo volume with driver and front passenger 2,593 91.6 Maximum total cargo volume with 5 passengers 1,233 43.5 Table 2. 6-Seater Cargo Volumes Area Volume (liters) Volume (cubic ft) Front trunk 183 6.5 Behind first row, second row in max cargo position, third row folded flat 2,431 85.8 Behind second row, third row folded flat 935 33 Behind third row 425 15 Maximum total cargo volume with driver and front passenger 2,614 92.3 Maximum total cargo volume with 6 passengers 608 21.5 Table 3. 7-Seater Cargo Volumes Area Volume (liters) Volume (cubic ft) Front trunk 183 6.5 Behind first row, second row folded flat 2,314 81.7 Behind second row, third row folded flat 957 33.8 Behind third row 425 15 Maximum total cargo volume with driver and front passenger 2,497 88.2 Maximum total cargo volume with 7 passengers 608 21.5       The Lyriq's cargo space is plentiful and it would seem like an engineering choice to favour rear space over the use of a frunk.  Is it a sound engineering choice? Possibly yes as the powertrain bits need not be crammed.   Is it a sound MARKETING choice? Time will tell as many folk really dont understand engineering choices all to well...   Nor do they seem to care.  If they want a frunk, they WANT a phoquing frunk... 
    • Lyriq Chief Engineer, Jamie Brewer, recently explained to GM Authority that the team decided to prioritize rear cargo space over two separate cargo areas. Thus, the 2023 Cadillac Lyriq will have a larger traditional rear storage area. In fact, according to Brewer, that enables the Lyriq to boast the “largest cargo volume in its competitive set.” That made us wonder what, exactly, is the Lyriq’s competitive set. According to Cadillac spokesperson, Katie Minter, it consists of the Audi e-tron and Jaguar I-Pace. “Lyriq is aimed at customers that are looking for a luxury SUV with outstanding styling, ride and handling and seamlessly integrated technology. In this instance, we’re looking at vehicles such as the Audi e-tron and Jaguar I-Pace,” Minter told GM Authority in an emailed statement. So then, Lyriq has a maximum cargo volume of 60.8 cubic feet behind the first row seats and 28.0 cubic feet behind the second row. When compared to the Audi e-tron and the Jaguar I-Pace, the Lyriq does offer more space in the back. 2023 Cadillac Lyriq Cargo vs. e-tron I-Pace   Cadillac Lyriq Audi e-tron Jaguar I-Pace Rear cargo volume behind second row (cu. ft.) 28.0 28.5 25.3 Rear cargo volume behind first row (cu. ft.) 60.8 56.5 51.0 Frunk cargo volume (cu. ft.) N/A 2.12 0.95 Total front & rear cargo volume (cu. ft.)* 28.0 30.62 26.25 * With second row seats upright However, both the e-tron and the I-Pace feature frunks (2.12 cubic feet in the e-tron, 0.95 cubic feet in the I-Pace respectively), allowing the e-tron to have slightly more total cargo volume (combined frunk and rear cargo area). https://gmauthority.com/blog/2021/05/heres-why-the-2023-cadillac-lyriq-doesnt-have-a-frunk/  
    • That's probably a better worded way to put it. It's a missed opportunity.  They're all liquid cooled at this point and I can't imagine Ford and Tesla are having battery cooling issues, at least I haven't heard of any yet and I've watched a fair amount on the Mach-E and know somebody with a pair of Teslas in Nevada.  I don't believe lack of cooling has ever been a factor in an EV catching fire. It's always something shorting and sparking with poor connection(s) somewhere.  I'd also like to learn why. They have to have a good justification, I know they're not a bunch of idiots who "didn't think of it".  I just don't want the press release answer of "we needed the space for packaging". 
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. bobo
      bobo
      (54 years old)
    2. loki
      loki
      (39 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We  Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...