GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,348 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
UK: GM strays from its common architecture strategy
26 Jan 2004
Source: SupplierBusiness.com




General Motors' top executives make much of the importance of leveraging "vehicle architectures" across the corporation's vast global product range.

Plans to derive a small Cadillac from the Epilson-based Saab 9-3 are the latest example.

So why did GM choose to develop an all-new architecture for the Pontiac Solstice sports car? Indeed, the lack of discipline leads to doubts about the company's commitment to cost reduction.

Yet one wonders if GM's Bob Lutz-led product planners are finally beginning to see the light - that the extra margins earned by successful products far exceed savings from platform sharing.



Full Article Here:

just-auto.com website


Ken
 
Joined
·
133 Posts
The author makes the point that GM strayed from the common platform approach in the 1970's and 80's becasue of competition, mainly from the Japanese. But if GM becomes the leader in quality and design, then it is those competitors who will suddenly be on the defensive. It's intersting to see this shift occur.

adios mi amigo. Time for an ice cold cervasa

The Super Nationals will be here in Albuquerque next week. Can't wait to see some good old restored vehicles. I'm hoping for a few more GTO's to compete with the Chevelles. The dude who played "John Milner" from 'American Grafitti' will be there too.

The 'General' is on it's way back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
504 Posts
Thats just a plain stupid article.

In order to share platforms, you have to have a platform to share. The Kappa will be used on 2 vehicles to start, and i bet more will follow.

Im guessing this guy would have had GM use the J-body for the Solstice?

Automotive journalists are proof that idiots do exist.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,963 Posts
Originally posted by Dumb_Ass_2003+Jan 28 2004, 06:22 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dumb_Ass_2003 @ Jan 28 2004, 06:22 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SteveWallace@Jan 27 2004, 05:05 PM
The question i've been asking myself is "could the Kappa platform be stretched for a Camaro return?"
Nope, that's why we're getting Sigma-Mass :D [/b][/quote]
I have one slight, yet potentionaly very massive problem with that.

The CTS weighs near 4k lbs. Thats with aluminum parts. What would a Stamped steel chassis weight? I hope the next Camaro weights 3300-3500lbs. With a "detuned" 390-380hp LS2 it would make for a nice car. Do you think GM would go live axle, or stay with the IRS? I think IRS could raise the price, but if its all factored into the development of the chassis. If a live axle is then adapted for that, it could end up costing more I guess. I hope that simga-mass/lite is making its way over here asap. I would also like more info on a Camaro like car coming up soon. I know someone has info on it, but they are not releasing it. Come on, we snuck out C6 info, we cant get Camaro info? Where is that AH-HA guy?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Originally posted by SteveWallace@Jan 27 2004, 07:05 PM
The question i've been asking myself is "could the Kappa platform be stretched for a Camaro return?"


One look at the Saturn Curve should answer this question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
954 Posts
Originally posted by bigals87z28@Jan 28 2004, 01:46 AM
I have one slight, yet potentionaly very massive problem with that.

The CTS weighs near 4k lbs. Thats with aluminum parts. What would a Stamped steel chassis weight? I hope the next Camaro weights 3300-3500lbs. With a "detuned" 390-380hp LS2 it would make for a nice car. Do you think GM would go live axle, or stay with the IRS? I think IRS could raise the price, but if its all factored into the development of the chassis. If a live axle is then adapted for that, it could end up costing more I guess.
As far as I understand Sigma-Mass is basically just Sigma with less aluminum and more steel for the expensive suspension parts, so that means that without a doubt we should be getting IRS, as well as the Hydro-formed Chassis. As for the weight issue, I think they would have no problem keeping it in the 3300-3500 range. Sigma is just an architecture so basically the frame and slightly different suspension are all a Sigma-Mass Camaro and a CTS would share. Plus the CTS is loaded with nearly every luxury device available in that price range. I highly doubt we'll be getting base Camaro's with DVD-Navs and high powered amps and subwoofers and all that other useless weight that doesn't belong in a Camaro.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,389 Posts
If Chevy is smart they put an IRS in any new Camaro. Ford has made a hugh error by not putting one in the new Mustang. Chevy could grab a big edge in the Pony car war here.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top