GM's Ongoing Weight Problem

[Lichtronamo]

Originally Posted by speedworxs

i noticed this a while ago, but no one is willing to drop convenience for mileage
ex. power windows / manual windows

Power windows weight less than manual windows because the wiring/motor is lighter than all the hardware needed for the crank. The GM EV1 and Honda Insight used electric windows for this reason.

[Buick61]

Originally Posted by tkrelston

And look how they have been called the new benchmark in interior quality. The weight creep is a problem, but there are far more important problems than just the weight. Cars that weigh more have the feeling of quality. Look at the luxury cars from Germany; they are all 4000 lbs, often more..

The CTS DI Manual is two hundred pounds heavier than a comparable BMW 535i. It's even heavier than the automatic Chrysler 300 Touring!

[wtgkb8]

Originally Posted by jasaero

This guy made a valid point. The malibu DOES have a 2 inch longer wheelbase. The structure required for that extra wheelbase will add up faster than overall dimensional structure.

A few hundred pounds is a stretch between these two cars also. Even the most decked out V6 versions only differ in weight by 50 pounds per MSN.autos.com.

http://autos.msn.com/research/compar...6247&v=t106150

I will agree with your write up in general though that GM needs to work on weight.

And, the Malibu has bigger wheels standard equipment...18s vs 17s...so there is a little added weight there.

[zete]

Originally Posted by AdmiralViscen

How about Lambda?

Here's a simple comparison. Both are AWD

            BMW X5   Buick Enclave CXL AWD
Weight         4982            4985
Seating         5               7
Length        191.1           201.8
Width          76.1            79.0
Height         69.5            72.2
Engine         3.0l            3.6l
Wheels         18"             19"

Here GM has a larger car with bigger wheels, more room and a bigger engine and it weighs only 3lbs more, to say nothing of the extra 2 seats. You can get the X5 with 7 seats, but I could only find weight for the base 5 seat model. Throw in the extra 2 seats and you're probably adding 100 - 200 lbs to the X5.

Figured that was quite interesting.

They do need to make their cars lighter, though.

[applepie]

There's a reason why the Honda Accord isn’t as quiet as the competition.

[t-rex]

The Vue AWD weighs more than the SRX. GM's clearly doing something wrong.

I refuse to believe that a power windows/seats and airbags (about the only thing common on todays cars that weren't there 20 years ago) can account for the nearly 1000-pound increase some segments have shown over the past 20 years.

Today's Cobalt weighs 300 pounds more than the bigger Chevy Citation did.

I think they can take some weight out through intelligent design without having to resort to expensive lightweight metals.

[bigtime]

Originally Posted by I-Love-Pontiac

Bob lutz addressed this in an interview. He mentioned that GM has just recently made weight a priority. He also made it sounds like any platforms that have already been engineered are not going to get any lighter.

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2...26/071845.html

He talks about weight later in the video

That's why he gets paid the big bucks.

[rlhmarine]

Originally Posted by ogg vorbis

how about comparing same engines/drivetrain??

I know GM needs to keep the weight in check and it's good that they are actively combating this issue. I personally will not have a daily driver that I can't have trust in it protecting me in an accident. I rolled my 93 Grand Prix LE sedan several times on a country curve at about 65 mph and walked away with no injuries. The GP looked like one of those NASCAR wreck jobs at Daytona and I had to get out over the dash, but it did it's job with no airbags.

P.S. Combination of a deer, fog, early morning and South Carolina road crew laying tar and pea gravel with no signs to warn.

[Masospaghetti]

Originally Posted by t-rex

The Vue AWD weighs more than the SRX. GM's clearly doing something wrong.

I refuse to believe that a power windows/seats and airbags (about the only thing common on todays cars that weren't there 20 years ago) can account for the nearly 1000-pound increase some segments have shown over the past 20 years.

Today's Cobalt weighs 300 pounds more than the bigger Chevy Citation did.

I think they can take some weight out through intelligent design without having to resort to expensive lightweight metals.

Today's Cobalt won't implode like a soda can in a collision, either. And I doubt the Citation has six airbags.

However, I did see an engineering writeup comparing a Civic to Cobalt, and had a weight breakdown of each part. Generally, the Civic's components were just engineered better -- the Cobalt's parts seemed overly bulky in comparison. Maybe they'll hold up better for wear, who knows.

[starlightmica]

Originally Posted by AdmiralViscen

How about Lambda?

Since Lambda was supposed to give rise to a [now cancelled] minivan, here are some minivan curb weights:

Nissan Quest SE: 4208 lbs
Toyota Sienna XLE FWD: 4266 lbs
Toyota Sienna XLE AWD: 4464 lbs
Honda Odyssey Touring/RES: 4678 lbs

Originally Posted by t-rex

The Vue AWD weighs more than the SRX.

4325 vs. 4302 lbs (Northstar/RWD). Yikes! how did that happen?

Lutz stated that platforms already engineered aren't going to have any weight reduced - does that mean the upcoming BRX is also going to outweigh the SRX?

[tkrelston]

Originally Posted by Buick61

The CTS DI Manual is two hundred pounds heavier than a comparable BMW 535i. It's even heavier than the automatic Chrysler 300 Touring!

This would be much easier if I weren’t trying to argue with only a Blackberry, but look at the price difference.* If the CTS started at 44,000 like the 5-series, maybe GM could afford aluminum sub-frames like the BMW.* Remember also how sensitive the BMW is when in minor bumps and how the whole front end must be replaced.* BMW has a $10 grand price benefit. Also look at the two, would you really want to be stuck in the BMW interior?* Features and materials aside, its design is as inviting as the last generation CTS’s.

[jwrebholz]

If they want to get serious about fuel economy they need to lighten the load. It's that simple. Maybe GM's cars aren't that far otu of line with their competitors, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't try to drop a few hundred pounds.

[runningshoes]

gm needs to sharpen its engineering pencils. the extra weight would be acceptable if that weight increase brought increased reliability and durability - this has not been shown. the extra weight would be acceptable if it were needed for increased safety and a higher level of features - this has not been shown. the extra weight would be acceptible if it did not adversely affect fuel economy - this has not been shown.

the only reason that gm has heavier cars is that they do not do enough of their engineering up front. they design the parts bulkier - the cars heavier - because they are neither good enough nor disciplined enough to design their cars lighter and with the same or better performance, and this is clearly evidenced by the fact that their opponents are able to perform the same task.

[Buick61]

Originally Posted by tkrelston

This would be much easier if I weren’t trying to argue with only a Blackberry, but look at the price difference.* If the CTS started at 44,000 like the 5-series, maybe GM could afford aluminum sub-frames like the BMW.* Remember also how sensitive the BMW is when in minor bumps and how the whole front end must be replaced.* BMW has a $10 grand price benefit. Also look at the two, would you really want to be stuck in the BMW interior?* Features and materials aside, its design is as inviting as the last generation CTS’s.

Which is why I included the larger Chrysler 300 Touring in the text of my comparison. It's lighter than the CTS, too.

I'm SO tired of this!!!!!!!!!!!

If I compare the CTS to the 5-series & E-class, then people complain because of the price differential. If I compare it to the 3-series & C-class, then people complain that there's a size difference.

So the CTS compares to everything when it's convenient and nothing when it's not.

Now I got it.

[Ultimate1]

Originally Posted by BigAls87Z28

GM's Ongoing Weight Problem
By BigAls87z28
GMInsidenews.com




Weight is something that plagues us Americans as a whole. We are always concerned about our weight, and always coming up with different diets on how to lose weight. Atkins, South Beach, or no eating at all, most everyone in America is or has tried to lose weight in the past. Some do well and can keep the weight off. Others try everything under the sun and the weight is still there. As America looks to other cultures on how to eat better to keep the weight off, places like Europe and Asia show us a different lifestyle of keeping the pounds from every reaching your body. How funny that art can imitate life? Our cars, especially from GM, tend to be overweight. Putting car versus car in every category, GM cars tend to always tip the scale. What is going on here?

GM's cars are no bigger, taller, wider then its competition? Yet some of them are way over the line? This weight problem also hinders one major concern that is now the hot topic with new cars and that is gas mileage. Heavy car = poor mileage, it’s just a fact. And to no surprise, GM cars tend to be on the lower side of EPA rated gas mileage scores as well, when compared to others in its segment. I noticed such a claim when I read into the February issue of Motor Trend when they compared the Malibu to its three Asian competitors: Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, and Nissan Altima. Big Al decided to investigate how long this has been going on, so I looked through years of magazines and on line articles and here is what I saw.

Looking at the specifications of the Malibu compared to the larger Accord, the Malibu is 100 pounds heavier? Could that be right? I looked back to 2004 when the NEW Malibu came out. Motor Trend also tested the Accord and Camry against two new sedans for that year, the Malibu LT and the Mitsubishi Galant. Then, the larger accord was lighter by a few pounds against the small little Malibu! I could not believe it. I checked out the Camry weight back in 2004 as well as the 2007 and Malibu is even heavier in both cases! What surprised me more was that ALL these cars had gone up 400lbs or more from 2004 to 2008! I do not like to rag or beat up on GM much, but this weight issue is a concern for all of us. I can see if this weight was due to the fact that GM uses more sound-proofing, stronger steel, or more steel parts over aluminum, but that’s not the case. Now since I don’t have the privilege of tearing up of these cars, we can go by what we read by magazine reviews.



The current Malibu is getting great remarks for its silence inside and its great ride when compared to Accord and Camry. We can say that quality of parts and materials are even across the board. So we look to the hard parts, the suspension and frame. Now, I have had first hand access to the Malibu as well as both the old and new Camry. I have also seen under the dress of several Honda Accords. I have yet to peek at the new Accord, so at this point we will leave that alone. Epsilon does use an extensive amount of aluminum for a car like this. Anyone driving behind any Epsilon car can usually make out the two large aluminum control arms that run parallel to the ground. They are pretty cool looking in person, and look to be solid pieces. There is also other extensive use of aluminum in the front lower control arms as well. This to me would make me think that the suspension is light, but when compared to the steel control arms of the Accord and Camry, I wonder where all this additional weight is coming from. In the most recent versions of these cars, they all have DOHC V6's, complex five or six speed automatic transmissions, and none have any other advanced power train additions such as all wheel drive, all wheel steer, or any other advanced suspension. It puzzles me, so I look at other comparisons.



I started at the bottom of the GM scale, right to the subcompact cars. I pitted the Aveo against the Yaris from Toyota. While the Aveo is about a half inch longer, a few inches here and there, the Aveo tips the scale at over 240lbs HEAVIER! How is that possible? Both with small 4 cylinder engines, both with manual transmission, both four-doors, with zero options. In a car like that, where do you hide 240lbs of mass? I did not think it could get worse. Usually when someone says that in their writing, it does. And, boy does it get worse. I kept going up the ladder, and took a look at the Cobalt against the Mazda 3, Honda Civic, and outgoing champ Toyota Corolla. Unlike the Aveo, where it was not the heaviest in its class, the Cobalt takes that title by over 400lbs to its nearest competitor, the Mazda 3. I decided to see if I can find something heavier to at least make the Cobalt look somewhat slim. I pulled up the heaviest car that could possibly take the title away. I grabbed a 2007 VW Rabbit four-door hatchback five-cylinder auto. I plugged in the car, and to my absolute astonishment....IT WAS STILL LIGHTER THEN COBALT! No way. No way did the German tank come in under the Cobalt. Had it beat by 80 pounds or so. The Cobalt's dimensions are no different than of the others. It’s simple strut front end and solid twist beam axle in the back is old compared to the multi-link rears from its competition. The only car I could find in GM stable that was lighter than its competition was the Corvette. From base C6 to ZR1, its hundreds of pounds behind its competition excluding Porsche.

GM has said that it will use more aluminum and other light weight metals, and that is great. Problem is that none of their other cars use THAT much aluminum to be lighter! So what are the imports using that GM is missing? The addition to more light weight materials will drive the cost of producing the car up, as well as the cost of making the car. There seems to be a great concern amongst Camaro fans that the car will tip the scale near two tons. GM has responded that they have "called Jenny Craig" so that they can rest the concerns of the Camaro faithful. But still, with GM's reputation of cars being heavier than its competitors, it can be expected that the car along with other vehicles in GM's line up will continue to be too heavy. If GM focused on how to reduce car weight with what they have, and have such a concentration on weight loss on EVERY vehicle, they could gain up to five miles per gallon easy! Every car person knows that lower weight will equal better performance, but also cutting down on the weight will improve a lot more than zero to sixty times. It will improve ride, NVH, braking, handling, comfort, on top of fuel economy and performance! There is a no lose situation with dropping weight. With a cut down in weight also means a cutting down on reinforcing structure to handle this heavy weight.

I ask GM, as a friend and as someone who wants to see them move forward and make great cars that they start to develop lighter cars. I do not know what makes the Accord lighter then the Malibu, but it is! Shave 100 pounds off every GM car, and you could not only see better gas mileage, but the car overall feels better. Steering response is better, ride is better, performance is better. GM has come a long way from only just 4 years ago, not to mention 10 years ago. With GM making new products that are hits such as the Lambda cars, the CTS, the 900 trucks and SUV's, the new Malibu, and future products like G8, Astra and Camaro, they need to start to work on making cars lighter. Understand what is needed to cut the fat. It is time to drop off some of these cars to Jenny Craig, Weight Watchers and then to the gym. GM will succeed making better cars once they figure out how to lighten them up. As a big guy I know what kind of work it takes just to get a person into shape. I hope that GM engineers know what it takes to lighten up future vehicles, so that they can tackle these tougher and tougher EPA standards as well as the consumer's demand for better gas mileage. A simple 100 pounds from every car could gain a few miles per gallon, all that is needed to stay ahead of the pack. Dropping a few hundred pounds could result in making or breaking these cars for the new EPA/CAFE ratings. GM's best engineers need to be back onto this, getting back to making every car lighter then the last.

Great Article!!! I have also been talking about GM's weight problem for a while and I hope they fix it soon.

I think on that issue alone it makes the Dodge Ram the most significant Domestic vehicle at the autoshow undercutting its previous model's weight by 100 lbs.

Ford and Dodge both used Higher strength steel on the chassis of their new trucks to use less materials and now they both cut weight despite offering more features. Maybe that is some of the culprit GM needs to use some more high strength steel to cut some beef off the parts?