Buick Teases Enspire Pure Electric SUV Ahead Of April 17 Debut

APR 9 2018 BY ERIC LOVEDAY 43

This all-new electric concept SUV will debut on April 17 in Shanghai and we’ll be at the show to capture it in all of its glory.

Buick says the Enspire concept is all-electric and notes that it fits into the SUV category.

Related – Buick Velite 6 PHEV & BEV To Launch In China

It seem likely Buick will sell this vehicle in China at some point in the near future. However, it’s not clear if it’ll ever be U.S.-bound.

We’ll have more details from the show floor in just over a week, so stay tuned.

The automaker only released this very limited info on the Enspire SUV:

Buick Enspire Concept SUV to Make Global Debut in China

 SHANGHAI – Buick today announced that the Enspire, its new all-electric concept SUV, will make its global debut at Buick Brand Night on April 17 in Wuzhen, Zhejiang. It will also be on display to the public at Auto China 2018 in Beijing, which begins later this month.

The Enspire leverages GM’s global resources and is an exploration of design and new technologies. It is the brand’s latest example of innovation and application of future electric smart mobility.

Categories: China, Concepts

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

43 Comments on "Buick Teases Enspire Pure Electric SUV Ahead Of April 17 Debut"

newest oldest most voted
WadeTyhon

According to several Chinese auto sites, the Velite 6 will be shown off April 17 as well.

https://carnewschina.com/2018/04/03/buick-will-launch-new-electric-car-in-china/

Should be an eventful day. 🙂 Hopefully one of these vehicles will be making its way to the US!

ffbj

The Velite is just a Volt, isn’t it?
Not all that eventful.

WadeTyhon

No, the Velite 5 is the rebadged Volt.

The Velite 6 is a new model with PHEV and EV drive train options.

Ronald Skinner

It Sounds like a phev that I might love

ffbj

Sure, thanks.

TheWay

I’d be happy just to see more EVs make it beyond concept and into production first. Then we can worry about availability in multiple geographies.

Thomas J. Thias / Clean Energy Retort™

From the horses mouth.

GM Media: 04.02.2018

“SHANGHAI – Buick will add two new models to its China portfolio – the VELITE 6 plug-in hybrid electric vehicle and VELITE 6 electric vehicle – to tap into the fast-growing domestic demand for new energy vehicles.

The new models will leverage electrification and connectivity technology from GM and its partners, including Buick’s newest eMotion electric propulsion technology. They are based on the VELITE Concept new energy vehicle that was unveiled in November 2016.”

Via | GM Media-
http://media.gm.com/media/cn/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/cn/en/2018/April/0402_Buick-Velite61.html

Best-

Thomas J. Thias
Publisher:
Clean Energy Retort™
517-749-0532

EVShopper

Was thinking about Barra’s pitch about their transition to EVs. She basically said they are pushing into China with EVs, and paying for the R&D and expansion needed by selling high profit Trucks and SUVs in the North American market. So, expect to see trucks and SUVs unveiled at the Detroit Autoshow, and the EVs for Shanghai and Beijing. Now, they are planning EV SUVs, so likely to see them sold in the US, but unveiled overseas first.

Just a theory. But I guessed this before this announcement of the Buick Enspire, so,…

Vexar

Perhaps GM will create a rivalry of some sort, and after releasing their Enspire, Lincoln will match with their Revellion. And then Nissan will electrify their SUV and call it Rogue 1. Of course this gag all hinges on when and where people can place their First Order.

Michael G

LOL! 🙂

Tim F.

The Ensipre will likely be built in China and exported to the U.S. like it’s gas cousin the Envision, assuming increases in tariffs don’t make this uneconomical.

WadeTyhon

Yes, the Enspire name has been floating around and was registered in the US years ago.

The naming convention perfectly ties to other US crossover models: Encore, Enclave, Envision.

Martin Winlow

It looks hideous already…

The rear styling looks a lot like the FNR-X concept that debuted at last year’s Shanghai Auto Show.
http://cardesignnews.com/media/404529/chevrolet-fnr-x-concept-2017-rear-angle-2.jpg

EVShopper

Good catch.

Chris O

So this is for China where GM’s compliance needs are increasing quickly and no amount of lobbying seems to work. So basically the chances of this making it stateside very much depends on how successful GM’s lobbyists turn out to be in convincing the Trump administration to lower CAFE standards and end the special treatment of the CARB states?

WadeTyhon

The primary automakers lobbying the government to lower standards are Ford, Fiat, Mercedes, Mitsubishi and Toyota. These automakers have been unable to meet CAFE or CARB ZEV standards so it is no surprise they’re the ones pushing for changes.

BMW, Nissan, GM are not quoted or sourced at all in the EPA determination document. Nissan says it is important that we keep the current single standard. When Mary Barra spoke with the EPA she made her goals very clear: better consider electric vehicles, ride sharing, and autonomous drive in emission standards.

The idea that GM is somehow taking the reigns and trying to kill CAFE is a narrative pushed by Electrek and Cleantechnica that they have no evidence for whatsoever. The actual evidence points to the opposite.

If you want a good laugh at the expense of Toyota and Fiat, you can read the document here:

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-04/documents/mte-final-determination-notice-2018-04-02.pdf

EVShopper

I like Electrek and Cleantechinica in general, but the authors have a huge anti GM bias. Maybe need to start accusing them of shorting GM? Like they accuse anyone with critiques of Tesla?

Chris O

You mean like this article:

https://electrek.co/2018/03/21/gm-electric-vehicles-ceo-barra-trump-fuel-consumption/

This quote from a GM spokesman clarifying Mary Barra’s position is telling:

“one national set of requirements” that “comprehend new technology developments like increased shared and autonomous electric vehicles.”

So yes it is specifically GM (if not just GM of course) that is going after Califonia’s special position and uses bogus arguments like ride sharing and (probably meaning “using”?)autonomous electric vehicles which it wouldn’t have to worry about if it were all that serious about plug-ins.

WadeTyhon

No. Our current system is a one national vehicle emission standard. This is the point. Automakers do not one separate standards like there were in the past.

Mary Nichols on the EPA move last week:
“This decision takes the U.S. auto industry backward, and we will vigorously defend the existing clean vehicle standards and *fight to preserve one national clean vehicle program.*”

WadeTyhon

*automakers do not want separate 😛

Chris O

Looks like California will want to stick to the proposed new CAFE standard even if the rest of the country reverts to a lower standard. Considering its emission wavers it can do that, targeting to those wavers means war. Looks like lobbies like GM’s effectively urge the EPA to go to war with California. One has to wonder what GM has to gain here if it is as serious about plug-ins as cars like Bolt and Volt suggest according to GM fans.

Chris O

GM is on record (per Mr. Pruitt’s agenda) sitting down with EPA’s Scott Pruitt to discuss more lenient emission mandates. Arguments used by GM that ride sharing or autonomous driving are somehow substitutes for more stringent emission standards are frankly laughable, though probably quite plausible for Scott Pruitt’s EPA.

Most major carmakers have announced major plug-in programs last year, if anything GM’s are modest by comparison.

ffbj

GM is the forefront of the attack against the current standards.

WadeTyhon

Based on what is GM at the forefront? Evidence citation please?

They are also at the forefront pushing for an extension/cap removal of the current federal credit. While Tesla of all companies has largely remained silent on the issue.

Chris O

Pretty nonsensical argument: if anything Tesla has a lot more to lose than GM from the current set up of the tax credit system: it’s credits are running out while most of its competitors still have plenty left. It’s effectively a reward for laggards at this point: the less EVs you bothered to sell the longer you retain an unfair competitive advantage over the trailblazers.

The competition is not other plug-in vehicles, so laggard doesn’t accurately depict the situation.

If an automaker wants to rest on its laurels during the phaseout, it’s their loss.

WadeTyhon

If it supports autonomous ride sharing and electrification, that is a whole lot better for the future than expanding the definition of light trucks or lowering the fleet mpg as other automakers are suggesting.

Chris O

I don’t see GM complaining about expanding the definition of light trucks, I think it would consider that just gravy on top of lower CAFE standards and the elimination of California’s more stringent emission mandates which it wouldn’t even have to worry about if it were serious about expanding EV sales.

WadeTyhon

This is what I mean. How is Toyota asking for expanding the definition of light trucks somehow the fault of GM? You think if GM, the big US automaker had made this request that the EPA wouldn’t have included it in the report?

No automaker is asking to eliminate CARB. Scott Pruitt might want to. Pruitt would gladly eliminate the EPA if he could. He is a stooge for the oil industry not the auto industry.

Fighting CARB and lowering emission standards is a lose lose for the auto industry. None of them want that. That means years of fighting in court which the EPA is sure to lose and public images dragged through the mud.

They want any changes to be agreed to by CARB and the EPA as the current standards are.

Chris O

Easy on the strawman arguments, I did not claim that GM is to blame for any lobbying for a change in the definition of light trucks (it might be, it sounds like something it would be involved in but I don’t know) nor did I claim that there is a GM lobby going on to do away with CAFE, just a lobby against the much more stringent Obama era proposals and California’s special position. Plenty of reports that GM is deeply involved in both.

You say that’s just a losing proposition but clearly it’s happening anyway and reports are that Pruitt is ready to go to war with CARB. Seems to me if the industry fears two different standards they will have little choice but to adopt CARB’s standards as CARB will not give up its special position without fighting to the bitter end.

WadeTyhon

Sorry, I am referring to Electrek/Cleantechnica when I say “This is what I mean.”

And yes I agree with you, if CAFE does decide to destroy the national standards, it is likely most automakers would side with CARB. Again, as Mary Nichols said:

“California will not weaken its nationally accepted standards for #cleancars, & automakers will continue to meet those higher standards, bringing better gas mileage & less pollution for everyone”

Chris O

I’m sure carmakers will side with CARB in case of EPA going for destruction of CAFE standards but that’s not what’s going on: the industry is lobbying for a lower than proposed new CAFE standard and CARB will have none of it, so no siding here, the industry is effectively going to war here with CARB.

EVShopper

We don’t know the details of those conversations, and if GM was trying to broker a truce between Pruitt and CARB to keep the existing standards. Pruitt has shown willingness to ignore industry and science and real data to push his own agenda. All GM has said is it wants a single standard. They are well positioned to meet the stricter standards with their EV investments. Putting them at an advantage vs laggards. If the Pruitt manages to roll back standards and create a hodge pudge, then GM could be at a disadvantage in the market compared to manufactures that are currently not in compliance.

That document doesn’t support your claim…

Toyota further  provided that  they  continue  to disagree  with  EPA’s  past assessment that lighter,  more aerodynamic vehicles  powered  by  less  expensive conventional  gasoline  powertrains  will be sufficient  to comply  with the  standards.

The Alliance and Toyota commented that the current full size pick-up truck incentives should be available to all light-duty trucks.

Toyota commented that its ultimate objective “remains a true, single national standard governing fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions in the future.”

WadeTyhon

All automakers support the current single national standard. They disagree on how to best implemented.

But you did quote where Toyota thinks the standards are not achievable and where they ask to extend the definition of ‘light trucks’ so that more of their vehicles qualify. That absolutely supports my claim.

Yep, the TSLA cult sites like electrek and cleantechnica want to make GM out to be the villain that’s trying to kill EVs “again”. Maybe they ARE GM shorts.
If that was the case, why would GM send official correspondence urging Maryland’s Public Service Commission to approve a plan to have $104 million of EV charging infrastructure installed in the state?
https://www.google.com/url?q=http://webapp.psc.state.md.us/newIntranet/Casenum/NewIndex3_VOpenFile.cfm%3FFilePath%3DC:%5CCasenum%5C9400-9499%5C9478%5C%5C42.pdf&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwiEu8LOsq3aAhVKmK0KHb_JA58QFggHMAE&client=internal-uds-cse&cx=011636095091740450913:jwqg8qctkzc&usg=AOvVaw2-mELeAGfqMQDaAgSrWKUu

Chris O

Not sure how GM’s efforts to make the taxpayer pay for infrastructure offsets its lobbying efforts against tougher CAFE standards and California’s special position.

WadeTyhon

That’s good that they’re supporting it!

Although it’s not exactly relevant. I’d rather GM give $100 million to install additional EV chargers on top of these.

But there’s nothing to complain about GM’s support for it here.

John Doe

That picture made me want to see the rest of the car.
In which countries do they sell Buick? US, China, ?

MTN Ranger

North America and China

Zach Hafen

So… where is it?