GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 20 of 77 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,113 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Commodore To Get Run Flat Tyres

Toby Hagon
15 August 2008
www.drive.com.au

Holden is re-engineering the Commodore to give it the performance of a V6 and fuel economy of a four-cylinder.

Holden is looking at removing the spare tyre from the Commodore and instead fitting controversial run-flat tyres as part of a broader plan to improve fuel efficiency by more than 20 per cent and reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

General Motors Holden chairman and managing director Mark Reuss says the imminent move to tyres that can be driven on after a puncture is designed to reduce weight, helping the V6 Commodore the efficiency of a four-cylinder.

Reuss believes getting the basics of the Commodore design right is more important than relatively expensive additions such as a hybrid powertrain, which he is now hinting will not happen as early as 2010. This is in contrast to General Motors group vice president Nick Reilly, who said hybrid Commodores would arrive in “a couple of years”.

“There’s a lot of things we can do in the near term and a lot of things we can do in the further term … there’s a lot more to go (in terms of efficiency improvements),” says Reuss, citing everything from weight reduction to more efficient tyres, engine improvements and better aerodynamics.

“It would be really stupid to make a sequential decision around a hybrid in a Commodore before we have efficiency in the base architecture done. I’m talking about all the pieces to get an efficient platform.”

Reuss believes the fuel economy of a regular, petrol engine Commodore can be reduced by 20 per cent or more. He says today’s official average fuel consumption figure of 10.8 litres per 100km could drop to 8.5L/100km.

That would make the entry-level Commodore as efficient as many of today’s smaller, mid-sized four-cylinder cars. A Mazda 6 uses a claimed 8.4 litres of fuel per 100km while a Toyota Camry uses 9.9L/100km.

Click here to continue article

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,881 Posts
memo to AU- make your zeta lighter or say bye bye to your existence

because?

I get it, no other porky vehicles are built in the GM world.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
812 Posts
Hopefully, some of those weight saving measures will show up on the Pontiac G8 as well. However, given the choice of run flat tires and no spare or regular tires with a spare, I'll take the spare. Run flats tend not to ride as smooth, and I've heard they don't give as much steering feel.

BMW does lead the way in pushing the run flats. I always liked how they and some of the other European manufacturers were among the last to offer full size spare tires.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,341 Posts
I believe the Corvettes went to run flats with the C5 over 10 years ago. As to weight, Mazda has been taking this approach for some time. They refer to it as adding lightness. Even further back is Lotus. Given the regulatory climate in North America and Europe all the manufacturers are going to have to do this or the fines will eat them alive. No wait they'll just pass them on to the buyer. ;) The only vehicle GM seems to be able to do this with is the Corvette. Otherwise, for a given amount of usable interior space the GM products tend to have the largest foot print and the highest weight when compared to their competition. To introduce a "pony car", Camaro, that is the size and almost the weight as a Cadillac CTS is inexcusable IMO. And yes I'm aware Chrysler did the same thing with the Challenger. And both for the same reason, didn't have the resources/commitment to develop a reasonable size/weight alternative. While GM is not the only offender on weight they are one of the more egregious IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,354 Posts
GM, why is it that everyone can do things that you cant even the companies under your control?

Umm, I hate to break it to you, but if Holden is doing it, then GM is doing it. You think they opperate autonomously?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,251 Posts
Good! Make all these enhancements and then lets see some more Zetas in the US.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
713 Posts
At first i had to laugh a bit..

Then i seen a few more things, At first i was getting the impression he was saying this, Remove the spare wheel and reduce fuel econemy by 20%.. I had a laugh..
But i guess there is a few more ideas in that..

Most of this i have herd in the building of the VE.. They wont use this lighter body, It cost to much, The IRS can be of light weight parts.. But cost wise? HSV only maybe..

lighter seats sounds smart, Small but smart..
But it should start with the heart the engine, Make that efficient and the rest will follow.
Run flat tyres, Give them a go.. The panels under the car sounds good also,
I really haven't herd super things about electric power steering, I have herd a few scary storys of slow reaction and dead felling ones.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
Holden is listening! Not that there was ever a problem with Holden in the first place, nor am I bagging the previous leader (who was DAMNED good!).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
713 Posts
You mean Denny Money, That a**e clown **** face **** rooten **** dog *** wipe pig **** face m***r ******??, That nice guy i miss him also:fall:.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
20,962 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
20,962 Posts
Re: Holden Commodore to Undergo Improvements

I think the original article misquoted the guy, it should be a 20% improvement in fuel economy, since that's basically what the article focused on.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,963 Posts
Well then...

Aluminum should be used more for the Commodore. Sounds like they want to make an XFE model.
How about Holden works with Opel to push foward a 3.0DI V6 making 260hp to replace the base 3.6 SFI engine? That in itself could reduce gas consuption as well as decrease emissions.
Problem with VE and Zeta is that they are built to handle up to or more then 500hp. If you preengineer that strength into the chassis ahead of time, there is less weight gain as the power goes up.
Look at the Mustang GT. 300hp V8 and 3500lbs, 200lbs lighter then a V6 Camaro with 300hp.
BUT a 500hp GT500 comes in at 2 tons. Thats 500lbs additional. Cant be ALL iron engine. Its cause the chassis needed additional work to handle the power.
But with Camaro, the car was designed to take 500hp and weight is minimal gain from the V6 to V8, most is related to larger brakes, wheels and tires as well as 6spd manual trans
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,245 Posts
Everyone wants more features in their car and to be safer but unfortunately everything u add to the car makes it heavier and with raw material prices shooting up it makes it even harder to go for the higher strength steel, its time GM and Ford got together to purchase large amounts of aluminium for their cars and trucks, at least buying together they can get more and save money to, maybe they could even build a place together to make all the parts they need for it, im sure some state over there would give a good deal on land and taxes to get some people in work. They could even purchase on behalf of there Australian operations to.

Would be nice if Holden could put out some version of BAS for the Commodore though, anyone have any idea how much that could save on fuel?? Does BAS weigh much to add to a car to?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,341 Posts
Well then...

Aluminum should be used more for the Commodore. Sounds like they want to make an XFE model.
How about Holden works with Opel to push foward a 3.0DI V6 making 260hp to replace the base 3.6 SFI engine? That in itself could reduce gas consuption as well as decrease emissions.
Problem with VE and Zeta is that they are built to handle up to or more then 500hp. If you preengineer that strength into the chassis ahead of time, there is less weight gain as the power goes up.
Look at the Mustang GT. 300hp V8 and 3500lbs, 200lbs lighter then a V6 Camaro with 300hp.
BUT a 500hp GT500 comes in at 2 tons. Thats 500lbs additional. Cant be ALL iron engine. Its cause the chassis needed additional work to handle the power.
But with Camaro, the car was designed to take 500hp and weight is minimal gain from the V6 to V8, most is related to larger brakes, wheels and tires as well as 6spd manual trans
Unfortunately the GM approach saddles all the units with the additional weight regardless of the take rate for the higher horse power units. This means poorer fuel economy for the buyers opting for the lower performance versions. With the new CAFE regs it also makes it more difficult for GM to reach their CAFE requirements, potential fines. It doesn't help with the handling either, see Lotus. In addition, from what I've read, the next generation Mustang will have higher horse power ratings, better fuel economy and weigh less. GM is really going to have to do better than they are, especially where weight and space utilization are concerned, if they want to be competitive i.e. stop losing money in North America by the cubic yard.
 
1 - 20 of 77 Posts
Top