GM puts brake on rear-drive vehicles

[Moosen75]

this sucks it really does i have been thinking about it and pretty much everything in GM's future is effected. think about this, new CTS-V gone, next gen Solistice/Sky gone, like LSx said the impala gone, gm was talking about bring more products from austrailia with more american flare are out the window, actually every thing cadillac is screwed. not cool

[Casull]

Originally Posted by LSxcellent

Oh, and just to be clear, I am ALSO wicked pissed that GM has halted this development. I was really looking forward to a 400hp Impala... it may have been my next family car.

Damn hippies...

~LSx

First of all, you are obviously FAR more knowledgable about the subject than I. But to clarify, i suggested that we use the money spent in comforming to the new regulations to further develop the aformentioned alternative fuel programs, not ramp up production of them. I understand that they produce less energy than gasoline does and it takes more energy to produce than gasoline does; however, they are also fairly new technologies and as with any new technology it will take time and MONEY to refine and improve the process.

As for the electric cars - I have mentioned MANY times in other threads that its greatest flaw is the fact that it often times creates more pollution to create the energy to charge them, than the polution put out by its gasoline counterpart. However, this is again using current technology. My suggestion is once again not to ramp up production but use the money to investigate new ways of using the technology. With as much energy that is created through the movement and braking of a car, my question is why can't we harness this energy and use it to recharge the batteries? I dunno... I am just saying use the money to research other possibilities or further refine what we do have.

As for Hydrogen... I just threw that out there. I am not at all an expert on hydrogen.

My point is this.... It just seems as though the government is targting the automotive industry because they are the most visible and the gov't is forcing them to spend their money to conform to a regulation that could instead be used to further develop alternative programs that could completely ween us from oil instead of just reducing our consumption...

[Dave McFly]

Originally Posted by KILLER74Z28

Cough Cough, Demolition Man…

[Moosen75]

agreed casull. i have feel the same way about electric. it really doesnt solve anything. but im like mister hydrogen around here bc im always saying its the way to go. but thats just my opinion. government needs to figure itself out and fix the problem not have the auto companies fix it for them. if they just throw these policies and regulations at the auto companies throw some money at them to to help pay the huge bills to get the solutions they need to meet the new CAFE and CO2 regulations

[LowRider]

idk but this is a bunch of stupid shit, like you all said look at all the cars that is not going to be made. All and why ain't ford effected by this stupid shit? But about the truckers. If the truckers would go on strike this country would go under. Because they basically hall everything from food to clothes to hazard shit. Beileve me I know my dad drives truck and he travels the whole east coast, carrying just lime to these coal companies, that way they can mine it so it heats some of our asses in the winter time.

[Casull]

Originally Posted by LowRider

idk but this is a bunch of stupid shit, like you all said look at all the cars that is not going to be made. All and why ain't ford effected by this stupid shit? But about the truckers. If the truckers would go on strike this country would go under. Because they basically hall everything from food to clothes to hazard shit. Beileve me I know my dad drives truck and he travels the whole east coast, carrying just lime to these coal companies, that way they can mine it so it heats some of our asses in the winter time.

I don't think anyone was questioning the need for the trucking industry....

As for Ford, I am sure that all automotive manufacturers are going to be affected equally. Ford is just not a vocal because they are in the process of restructuring and didn't have any big programs on the line that they had to put a halt to like the Zeta program for GM.

[Moosen75]

yea gm has more riding on future rear wheel drive vehicles then ford. their mustang is already out and established unlike the greatly effect future gm projects.

[AFSNightrod]

I'm just worried that the Camaro will end up being a one or two year deal which will be price gouged by both dealers and private resellers alike. If that happens, My $40-$45k is either getting dumped into my Trans Am in mods or going towards a completely restored 1970 SS396 Chevelle (454s are way too much money. Thanks Barrett Jackson.). Either way I will be happy with a gas hog muscle car that is in no way enviornmentally friendly. If it get's that serious I'll move to Kuwait or somewhere else in the middle east where gas is cheap, nobody gives a damn about emissions, and everybody and their brother drives a V8 RWD American car. I think flying through downtown Baghdad in my TA would be a hell of a rush. I'm deployed here and it makes me quite jealous that nearly every sports car here is the top of the line version, and they are filling the tank for about five bucks. In the mean time I'll keep driving my 23,000LB, 100AWHP M1114 armored Hummer with a hollowed out cat that gets about 150 miles on a tank of diesel. ::end rant::

[KILLER74Z28]

Lutz on Zeta Future: Camaro Safe, but Impala Work Stalls -

Daily Auto Insider

CAFE fears blamed for forced product paralysis.

BY ALISA PRIDDLE, April 2007


The Pontiac G8 and Chevy Camaro are still a go—barely—but uncertainty over possible strict new fuel-economy regulations has jeopardized plans for a rear-wheel-drive Chevy Impala and other vehicles from this architecture.

In an interview at the New York auto show with CARandDRIVER.com, GM vice chairman Bob Lutz was brutally frank about the uncertain fate of large cars and engines, and his fear for the survival of two separate global rear-wheel-drive architectures.

The best-known program is the Global RWD Architecture, formerly referred to as Zeta. It will serve as the underpinnings of a wide range of cars of varying lengths, from stretched limo-like proportions of the Buick Royaum for China, to the shorter and muscular lines of the pending Camaro.

Engineered by Australian subsidiary Holden, the Global RWD Architecture already is on the road Down Under as the Holden Commodore. For North America, first out of the gate will be the G8 when it goes on sale in early 2008.

And, after years of hype, the Camaro finally will bow in early 2009, followed by a convertible a year later. But everything after that is in jeopardy.

The fly in the ointment is President Bush’s push to reduce dependency on foreign oil, expected to translate into tougher corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards for passenger cars and light trucks.

Until the shoe drops, GM has no choice but push a giant snooze button on future rear-drive vehicles, from development of a super Cadillac based on the 2003 Sixteen concept, to halting plans to take the next-generation Impala rear drive.

“If the government wants a 30 percent improvement in fuel economy for each size class, I can’t get Zeta 30 percent more efficient,” Lutz said. “It would be like going from 20 mpg to 30 mpg. We don’t know how to do it.”

The G8 was too far along to pull the plug, but the Camaro was on the bubble, he confides. “But, after discussion, Camaro is still a go.”

Not so lucky is the Impala, which wasn’t due until the fall of 2009 or later. It definitely is on pause and its ultimate orientation up in the air. “Whether we will do it at all, as rear-wheel drive, is now in question,” Lutz said.

The Monte Carlo will not migrate to Zeta, Lutz said. “We won’t do a rear-wheel-drive coupe.”

And plans for the next-generation DTS remain uncertain. If it doesn’t migrate to Zeta or merge with the STS, it could see another lifetime as a front-wheel-drive sedan.

The other casualty is a second platform, the Global Small RWD Architecture that is in its infancy.

Lutz said GM had begun design and engineering work on the Global Small RWD Architecture at a U.S. design studio, for undisclosed brands. Our guess is a rear-drive entry-level Cadillac was in this pool, below the CTS—but not the BRX (a proposed small front-drive SUV based on the Cadillac BLS sold in Europe).

Chatter was a five-seat GMC also would be part of the new lineup designed to compete with the likes of the BMW 1-series, Audi A3 and Mercedes A-Class.

Lutz now says that, if faced with extreme fuel economy legislation, GM might need to convert vehicles planned for the Small RWD Architecture to a mid-sized front-drive platform instead. One such candidate could be the future TE (enough letters for you so far?) architecture, which would build car-based utility vehicles beginning in the 2010 model year, from components of both Epsilon (Global Midsize Vehicle Architecture) and Theta (Global Compact Crossover Architecture; vehicles such as the Saturn Vue and Chevy Equinox).

For now, work on this family must wait, lest the platform prove too thirsty to meet potential CAFE regulations that seemingly would favor front-wheel drivers that weigh less and sip less fuel.

Trying to make rear-drivers compliant would consume engineering and capital resources, Lutz said at the New York show. “It’s a huge problem. Even if we could meet new proposed standards, it would be cost prohibitive.”

Lutz earlier told reporters the Bush Administration’s plan to raise fuel economy standards four percent a year through 2017 would add about $5000 to the cost of each GM vehicle. It is all part of a proposal to decrease oil dependency some 20 percent by 2017, five percent of which would come from improved fuel efficiency standards. The other concern is the recent Supreme Court decision that allows the Environmental Protection Agency to set standards for limiting carbon dioxide emissions—which can be accomplished by increasing fuel efficiency.

[TAG UR IT]

At least the Camaro still goes into production. Every major car co. wants to improve gas mileage, just like Lutz was saying. That first article put out I thought was a good idea....until the after effects are seen. Not good for a on the rise rear wheel drive GM car co. Not good at all. So, does this mean we will pretty much be the only country in the world working on saving our Earth while 3rd world countries continue to pour out pollutants into the environment??? Uh....yeah....

[Mr. Wyndham]

No Crap....I was watching C-Span last night - shut up, it became interesting. - It was John Kerry, and some other guy(rep.) debating over pollution(CO2) and a little on the auto industry. Tag: it turns out that We- America- actually are one of the worst countries, as far a fixing pollution goes. All of Europe is in on a plan to fix themselves, even China (who took some of our technologies to do so) are in better shape than the US. I'll be plain in saying: it's our governments fault. Kerry said two things that I almost cried with joy over.

1) He commented on the Toyota Prious, saying that it got great fuel mileage and minimal emmisions, but wished to God it was an american car. That the government should be funding our Auto industry instead of leaving them out to dry......

2) If he and his opponent(the rep.) were in charge of fixing CO2 problem, they could create, and in fact already sort of have a solution they could implement tommorrow. But they are in fact not in charge, only loud annoyances, because the government is still "deep in thought"(that's me talking).

This is going to suck on sooo many different levels - and yes, even for the Camaro. My biggest fear was not so much "is this car going to be good" but "will people like this car an keep it running". I was finally settling on a positive answer, when this hits me in the face.
This may make the Zeta archetecture - the best thing for GM since hydramatic - obsolete and useless. We already know that this has halted other car models. But this could also end up causing any future generations or even model years of Camaro to be non-existant. That's point one, Point two is this; that that $5 000 dollars will be able to be tacked on to the Camaro. I will have this car, but I don't want to have to buy a V6.

Ohh, I don't know. :(Why the bloody Hell does Bush have to be such an Idiot. First He puts us into a meaningless war started by a personal vendetta, and now he's got the great Idea to reduce our international fuel dependancy ----- by choking the crap out of the US car companies....Why not punish the foriegners too, or help our boys, "well, um.........uh, nucler....." - Dumbass


Oh and in regards to the alternate fuels...I won't say I'm an expert. But I did do a thesis paper on this(lots of research:o). And In no way can Ethanol be an end-all solution. To that I agree. But neither can any other fuel source. I see, and I hope others can too, that the future of fuel in the US, and the world will be diverse. Depending on the area, and the climate - what works for one of us won't work for the other. So we will incorporate a many number of different fuel sources. This is where GM is going with thier E-flex system. Hydrogen in some areas, ethanol in others, possibly still a little gasoline, and completey electric in others.

And on a final note: to produce any of the alternate fuel sources, it will make some sort of pollution, but the difference between those and the pollution to make gasoline - just to burn it and make more - is HUGE........
(Deep Breath)

[Tran]

General Motors may be forced to scrap or significantly rethink its rear-wheel-drive Zeta platform vehicles, according to a new report in the Chicago Tribune.

We've pushed the pause button. It's no longer full speed ahead Vice Chairman Bob Lutz said. It's too late to stop the Camaro, but anything after that is questionable or on the bubble he said. This includes the next-generation Imapla; if we call it Impala, he cautioned. Until now, GM was widely expected to build its Impala replacement on the RWD Zeta architecture, plus a number of other vehicles, including a new Pontiac GTO, Buick sedan, Chevy Monte Carlo, a Cadillac model, and more. The Pontiac G8 also rides on the platform.

Lutz blamed new government regulations proposed by the Bush administration. The proposal aims to gradually raise corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards to average 34 mpg by 2017.

We don't know how to get 30 percent better mileage from rear-wheel-drive cars Lutz said. We'll decide on our rear-drive cars when the government decides on CO-2 levels and CAFE regulations he added.

Carbon dioxide is a natural byproduct of burning gas and directly proportional to the amount of fuel burned. If we legislate CO-2 from cars, why not legislate we take one less breath per minute since humans release capricious amounts of CO-2 each time they exhale? he argued.

Lutz said increasing efficiency is not nearly as easy as environmentalists claim. Academics assure us that for $200 we can get 30 percent better mileage. If anyone can figure out how to do that for $200 or even for $1,000, I want them in my office today. Show me how to do it and we'll adopt it, he said. If I could increase mileage by 30 percent for $200, why wouldn't I? What's my motivation not to when a gas-electric hybrid gets 27 percent better mileage and I hope someday to get the cost down to $9,000?

Small-car mileage only counts toward CAFE if you build them here, and you can't build small cars here at a profit, Lutz said.

[Moose]

I read that as well.

I hope GM can figure out a way to continue development of rwd vehicles. I think it's a pretty important element for them.

Not to sound callous, but I'm relieved that the Camaro is "OK".

[Mr. Wyndham]

I'm afraid the Camaro may not be "ok". If Zeta is such a problem that they cancelled all cars riding on it...they will have to rethink it's design in the coming years if it is to evolve and stay in the loop.

Remember, he said it was too late to stop Camaro, not that he didn't need too........