Response by MT blogger to MT's "GM rationalizes RWD" article

[Scotsman]

DETROIT - Now comes word from Automotive News that General Motors has cancelled plans for a 2011 rear-drive Chevrolet Impala and Buick Lucerne. Blame proposed Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards (CAFE), says the piece on the newspaper's Web site. Mike Connor reports in the July Trend section of Motor Trend (in your mailbox any day now), that the RWD Impala "is all but off the table."

In the piece, "GM rationalizes rear drive," Connor says that General Motors' Sigma and Zeta architectures will be converged into one, with six versions on three wheelbases. The large, 118.5-inch-wheelbase version will accommodate the 2011 Cadillac converged STS/DTS replacement and possibly the 2011 Buick Lucerne replacement.

CAFE be damned, I think this is a mistake. Killing the RWD Impala is not.

Heresy, you say? No, not really. Fact is a RWD Impala would fall right on top of the Pontiac G8 in terms of market position. And like Pontiac, but unlike Buick, Chevrolet will soon have two RWD cars on the market, the Corvette and Camaro. Enthusiasts might want a RWD Impala, but what could it do that the G8 can't? I doubt it would come in at a lower price than the Pontiac. The FWD Impala is a best-seller, and it competes directly with Ford's FWD/AWD Taurus.

As for Buick, the RWD Lucerne replacement would be a low-volume car, without much negative effect on GM's CAFE numbers. Yes, I understand that GM wants -- and if the CAFE standard is enacted -- needs all 2011 and later models to get better fuel mileage than the models they replace. Because the Northstar V-8 replacement has been cancelled, the Buick probably would have been V-6-only, using the gas direct-injection version of the 3.6-liter engine. What's more, it would have been the kind of car best-suited to a six-cylinder diesel engine; either the 2.9-liter V-6 that soon will power European-market Cadillac CTSes, or perhaps something a bit bigger, which GM should be developing for Cadillac to compete with Mercedes and BMW. A V-6/hybrid would have been a good idea, too. A RWD Buick also could be marketed to livery drivers in New York and other cities, giving GM a good test-bed for reliability and good volume for this platform without diminishing the prestige of the Cadillac model.

A RWD Lucerne replacement would have provided Buick-Pontiac-GMC dealers with better balance; the big rear-drive Buick would have been a good top-of-the-range anchor, balancing the entry-Buick FWD LaCrosse and complementing the upscale AWD/FWD Enclave. It would have been a near-luxury, near-Cadillac sedan with Enclave-like lines but with a long dash-to-axle ratio, a potential moneymaker for those dealers, bearing little resemblance to the popularly priced Pontiac G8. Rear-drive hasn't hurt Toyota's or Nissan's luxury brands, and I doubt the '11-'15 CAFE standards will cause Lexus or Infiniti to change most its models to front-drive.

You can blame this on GM's wholesale shift to FWD in the 1980s. You can also blame this on more recent, shortsighted GM management that didn't foresee the Chrysler 300/Dodge Charger, Hyundai Genesis or the popularity of rear-drive Japanese cars. Providing appropriate GM divisions with RWD models would be a good way to prepare for the uncertainties of the future. If and when Lexus and Infiniti prove they can meet future CAFE standards without switching to FWD, Buick will once again be left behind, left for dead.

http://blogs.motortrend.com/6247816/...uch/index.html

Better product planning would have spared GM A LOT of the problems they're now facing and having to deal with. It's like the execs are on Golf outings more than they are in the office straightening out business. The author of this piece said it best when he included Lexus and Infiniti as examples. Along with BMW, Porsche, and Mercedes they will NEVER EVER stop making RWD cars to meet any sort of fuel economy regulations. Doing so would deplete their brand equity and send customers elsewhere.

[Mr. Wyndham]

I really don't get what this guy is trying to say...is he talking about JUST the luxury brands of GM? He's going in circles it seems....

Originally Posted by Scotsman

Better product planning would have spared GM A LOT of the problems they're now facing and having to deal with. It's like the execs are on Golf outings more than they are in the office straightening out business.

Or....The board of directors of a HUGE corporation can't make up their minds quick enough. It's the company execs jobes to make buisness decisons and approve ideas, it's the boards job to approve products.

Originally Posted by Scotsman

The author of this piece said it best when he included Lexus and Infiniti as examples. Along with BMW, Porsche, and Mercedes they will NEVER EVER stop making RWD cars to meet any sort of fuel economy regulations. Doing so would deplete their brand equity and send customers elsewhere.

+1...But did the author take into account that BMW, Porche, etc don't make every-day, inexpensive family sedans? Or that they are significantly smaller companies selling significantly smaller numbers of vehicles than GM? Which means that 50,000 5-series aren't going to have the same effect on overall Fleet fuel economy ratings as 250,000+ Impalas would...not to mention RWD suddenly makes the Impala unattractive (for stupid reasons) to half of those buyers -- meaning reduced sales on an all-new product.....

I think GM could have gotten a few more RWD cars out already...but I don't think anything they've done up until this point (on the RWD front) has been all-out wrong. I don't think comparing GM to these companies is very fair.

[Scotsman]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

+1...But did the author take into account that BMW, Porche, etc don't make every-day, inexpensive family sedans? Or that they are significantly smaller companies selling significantly smaller numbers of vehicles than GM? Which means that 50,000 5-series aren't going to have the same effect on overall Fleet fuel economy ratings as 250,000+ Impalas would...not to mention RWD suddenly makes the Impala unattractive (for stupid reasons) to half of those buyers -- meaning reduced sales on an all-new product.....

I think GM could have gotten a few more RWD cars out already...but I don't think anything they've done up until this point (on the RWD front) has been all-out wrong. I don't think comparing GM to these companies is very fair.

I think you're missing a point that may not have been so clear. Obviously (and I sure wouldn't expect this) GM isn't going to make nothing but RWD products for the market, BUT a few RWD products don't have to be killed because they have to achieve a fleet average of 35mpg by 2020 (2015 really), especially when by and large most of the cars they make already are FWD. It makes them look scared when companies like Porsche, BMW, Nissan, Toyota and others are making and developing RWD products that are a LOT smaller of companies that have even tighter finances to work with than GM.

I think if GM made nothing but FWD cars, though they would find buyers most of everywhere, but they'd lose their sheen as a global powerhouse. To be that you have to offer compelling products that appeal to a range of tastes, and that's where RWD comes in. Like I've said before GM would be STUPID to cancel future generations of cars like the CTS and G8 because they're already such stellar and capable vehicles. Making them further efficient to fit in with the times where fuel economy and environmental pollution from cars is such a concern shouldn't mean the end of them, it is more than doable. If every report mentioning "RWD" and "GM" didn't sound so dire I doubt discussions like this wouldn't even occur.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Allright. I'm on the same page, now...I think.

But (playing Devil's advocate) how many more RWD performance cars does GM really need? Maybe they should just improve on their current ones, instead? (Make them not just great, but stellar!)

To date (and including next year) there should be:

Caddy CTS
Caddy CTS-V
Caddy STS
Caddy XLR
Pontiac Solctice (and coupe)
Pontiac G8
Saturn Sky
Chevy Corvette
Chevy Camaro


Then supposedly, beyond the now-shelved Impala, there's two more Zetas coming (one for Caddy; what's the story with the Pontiac Ute?), and Two Alpha cars (one for Caddy and one for Buick...possibly a third for Pontiac). I'm not seeing much of a RWD problem for a company with as broad a consumer-base as GM....

[Scotsman]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Allright. I'm on the same page, now...I think.

But (playing Devil's advocate) how many more RWD performance cars does GM really need? Maybe they should just improve on their current ones, instead? (Make them not just great, but stellar!)

To date (and including next year) there should be:

Caddy CTS
Caddy CTS-V
Caddy STS
Caddy XLR
Pontiac Solctice (and coupe)
Pontiac G8
Saturn Sky
Chevy Corvette
Chevy Camaro


Then supposedly, beyond the now-shelved Impala, there's two more Zetas coming, and Two Alpha cars (possible replacements/possible additions). I'm not seeing much of a problem for a company with as broad a consumer-base as GM....

I think GM really needs the Alpha cars for accessible and sensible options for consumers looking for performance products that don't need the size or space of the G8. Consumers who want something practical, fuel efficient and affordable in a rear wheel driven performance package. With the market trending towards smaller cars this makes perfect sense. A Pontiac Alpha and Cadillac Alpha car wouldn't hurt their portfolio, it would only enhance it. Heck, throw another Alpha car for Chevy while you're at it. They don't all need to be sedans, they can get creative, they could even build the next Solstice and Sky off of the Alpha platform to spread costs.

[stovt001]

I agree with this guy. A RWD Impala would be pointless. A FWD/AWD (next gen should offer AWD) version would compete perfectly against the Taurus, Toyota Avalon, and Honda Accord. A RWD version would just cannibalize G8 sales and limit its appeal. Buick can do fine with mostly FWD models (just look at the Lexus ES as proof) but a RWD flagship would give the brand a nice crowning halo while giving commercial fleets an upscale model without compromising Cadillac's image. (Point of interest: in Germany taxis are E-Class Mercedes). A V6 hybrid-powered highly featured Buick could be a very stylish destination car for many people. The two-mode hybrid seems to be made for something just like that. FWD is all well and good for most mainstream cars, and I'm glad the Impala is staying FWD, but I think there is room for just one RWD car in Buick's lineup.

[storm79]

i dont see where this guy is going either he is going in circles it seems like and sorry id rather pay 40000 for a luxury cts then like 8627093456729 for a mercedes or bmw ya know i think gm is doing fine and i like the way their lineup is starting to look personally

[TAG UR IT]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Allright. I'm on the same page, now...I think.

But (playing Devil's advocate) how many more RWD performance cars does GM really need? Maybe they should just improve on their current ones, instead? (Make them not just great, but stellar!)

To date (and including next year) there should be:

Caddy CTS
Caddy CTS-V
Caddy STS
Caddy XLR
Pontiac Solctice (and coupe)
Pontiac G8
Saturn Sky
Chevy Corvette
Chevy Camaro


Then supposedly, beyond the now-shelved Impala, there's two more Zetas coming (one for Caddy; what's the story with the Pontiac Ute?), and Two Alpha cars (one for Caddy and one for Buick...possibly a third for Pontiac). I'm not seeing much of a RWD problem for a company with as broad a consumer-base as GM....

Don't forget the Redline Sky. If I could only fit in it.

[Scotsman]

Originally Posted by TAG UR IT

Don't forget the Redline Sky. If I could only fit in it.

Seriously. Upgrading that car to a larger platform would definitely be a step in the right direction.

[stovt001]

I disagree. Too many cars supersize these days. I think the Sky and Solstice are the perfect size. Maybe packaging revisions could free up more interior space, but I wouldn't want it any physically bigger.

[Scotsman]

Originally Posted by stovt001

I disagree. Too many cars supersize these days. I think the Sky and Solstice are the perfect size. Maybe packaging revisions could free up more interior space, but I wouldn't want it any physically bigger.

Whatever it takes to help people my size fit.