Clearly the 60D is priced too closely to the T3i. Over the years, Canon has effectively narrowed the price range between the xxD and the Digital Rebel. When I bought my 20D, the price of the 20D was $600 (US) more than the Rebel XT. There is now only a $150 (US) difference between the 60D and the Rebel T3i. As pointed out by the article “No 7D Mark II”, the 60D is now viewed as a Super Rebel.
In order for the 70D to move up, it would need to have enough advantages over the top-of-the-line Digital-Rebel to set it apart. This would be expected to result in an increase in price, of course. So far, so good.
The question is whether eliminating 7D and having the 70D being in the previous xxD niche – now occupied by the 7D – would be a help or a hindrance; that is, whether a higher-priced xxD would be considered to be a top-of-the line DSLR or an overpriced Super Rebel. If it’s the latter, the xxDs could wind up being viewed as another Edsel. (For the uninitiated, the Edsel was a very good car; but, consumers viewed it as overpriced and did not buy it in sufficient numbers, thereby causing the Ford to close down the line after 3 years.) It might be better for Canon to eliminate the top-of-the line Digital Rebel so that there would be more of a price spread between the Digital Rebel and the xxD. This would return the Digital Rebel to it original purpose as a consumer / entry-level DSLR, thereby emphasizing the difference between the Digital Rebel and the xxD.