When you get right down to it...

[Camino LS6]

... there is no legitimate reason for a wholesale abandonment of the Zeta architecture. It is a product ready for release with all of its development money spent. It has been crtically acclaimed, and certainly sets a new standard for GM RWD.

I will concede that in its present form its shelf life may be shorter than it would have been due to outside factors, but to toss it aside before letting it prove itself in our market is pure stupidity. If CAFE and fuel prices and currency issues pinch it back in the coming years, so be it. But to invite a huge and obvious loss when the product itself is so strong makes no sense.

A pendulum swing back to all FWD all the time is unnecessary panic. The product mix needs to be there to legitimize and showcase the range of capability GM can bring to bear. A better choice would be to offer these cars in a decent array and trim the models back as the market requires. GM isn't ready to replace them with anything of value at this point, so simply from the perspective of gaining development time for projects such as Alpha, it makes good sense to bring the Zetas to market for at least one generation. Doing this allows GM to get some return on the investment in both real dollars and intangibles as opposed the the defeatist mentality of running scared back to the failed concept of trying to compete with also-ran FWDs exclusively.

GM needs to use the breadth of capability which only it has in this industry to set itself apart. Managed properly, GM can field the widest variety made by any single company worldwide. To restrict itself to only smaller FWD cars and a few sizes of light truck would be to squander its best assets. One would think that GM had learned not to put all of its eggs in one basket by now. That approach has never done anything but punish them in the marketplace.

[jcgable]

... there is no legitimate reason for a wholesale abandonment of the Zeta architecture. It is a product ready for release with all of its development money spent. It has been crtically acclaimed, and certainly sets a new standard for GM RWD.

I will concede that in its present form its shelf life may be shorter than it would have been due to outside factors, but to toss it aside before letting it prove itself in our market is pure stupidity. If CAFE and fuel prices and currency issues pinch it back in the coming years, so be it. But to invite a huge and obvious loss when the product itself is so strong makes no sense.

A pendulum swing back to all FWD all the time is unnecessary panic. The product mix needs to be there to legitimize and showcase the range of capability GM can bring to bear. A better choice would be to offer these cars in a decent array and trim the models back as the market requires. GM isn't ready to replace them with anything of value at this point, so simply from the perspective of gaining development time for projects such as Alpha, it makes good sense to bring the Zetas to market for at least one generation. Doing this allows GM to get some return on the investment in both real dollars and intangibles as opposed the the defeatist mentality of running scared back to the failed concept of trying to compete with also-ran FWDs exclusively.

GM needs to use the breadth of capability which only it has in this industry to set itself apart. Managed properly, GM can field the widest variety made by any single company worldwide. To restrict itself to only smaller FWD cars and a few sizes of light truck would be to squander its best assets. One would think that GM had learned not to put all of its eggs in one basket by now. That approach has never done anything but punish them in the marketplace.

Here Here!

[Camino LS6]

It's the lack of logic about all of this which shocks me most.

[Intrepidation]

Exactly.

[regfootball]

GM got crucified a few short years ago for not having RWD to combat the then popular 300.

the point to all this is that GM should always have some RWD entries, even in times when they are not selling hot. because when they do, then you have the platform there. and some will always want it regardless. the point is to always update it, keep it fresh, and redesign it on a planned schedule.

in this regard GM fails.

same thing with small cars. 5 years ago, no one wanted small cars so GM didn't invest in them. Now look at the mess they are in being behind the curve.

GM's problem is being reactive and not proactive. 7-8 years ago the press and pundits told every automaker to buy many brands and chase every niche. Now, GM Ford etc are criticized for doing exactly that and are forcing themselves to trim models to get out of that mess. How did we get the solstice? Niche car craze, that's how. GM would not build that car now, I bet.

RWD is always a core product, or has been, in many regions for GM. For them to abandon it or delay it or deplete it shows piss poor management really, they should be able to pull it off in spite of CAFE and europe and all that other BS. If they cannot manage the heat, then get out of the kitchen.

Minivans, another example. So you're telling me the worlds largest automaker cannot figure out how to steal a platform and make one example of a minivan that would sell 60-70k a year? Incompetence is what that is. How f@#king tough is it to design seats that fold into the floor and to make it look nice enough and get good crash test ratings? Chrysler can figure out how to build it at a decent price, and GM cannot? Moronic, if you ask me. They are putting ALL their eggs in lambda crossovers and i think to use that as an excuse to completely ignore vans is again reactionary and short sighted. But that is how GM works.

Here's a market segment in dire need of update that GM and Ford are ignoring. They need to update their full size / cargo vans for better mpg and handling etc. and such before toyota gets in on that also.

Edited January 21, 2008 by regfootball

[Camino LS6]

I agree that GM should always have something in their back pocket for just about any market at all times.

[2005 EquinoxLS]

GM got crucified a few short years ago for not having RWD to combat the then popular 300.

the point to all this is that GM should always have some RWD entries, even in times when they are not selling hot. because when they do, then you have the platform there. and some will always want it regardless. the point is to always update it, keep it fresh, and redesign it on a planned schedule.

in this regard GM fails.

same thing with small cars. 5 years ago, no one wanted small cars so GM didn't invest in them. Now look at the mess they are in being behind the curve.

GM's problem is being reactive and not proactive. 7-8 years ago the press and pundits told every automaker to buy many brands and chase every niche. Now, GM Ford etc are criticized for doing exactly that and are forcing themselves to trim models to get out of that mess. How did we get the solstice? Niche car craze, that's how. GM would not build that car now, I bet.

RWD is always a core product, or has been, in many regions for GM. For them to abandon it or delay it or deplete it shows piss poor management really, they should be able to pull it off in spite of CAFE and europe and all that other BS. If they cannot manage the heat, then get out of the kitchen.

Times change. Like it or not FWD is here to stay. They should yes have one or 2 RWDs for those that want them. How many are there in the snowbelt that want this?

Minivans, another example. So you're telling me the worlds largest automaker cannot figure out how to steal a platform and make one example of a minivan that would sell 60-70k a year? Incompetence is what that is. How f@#king tough is it to design seats that fold into the floor and to make it look nice enough and get good crash test ratings? Chrysler can figure out how to build it at a decent price,

GM though can make it so the transmissions dont fail at 50,000 miles. Chrysler makes it at a cheaper price due to using cheaper parts. Maybe GM knows better. If GM didnt want AWD they too could make the seats fold into the floor. Maybe thats coming.

and GM cannot? Moronic, if you ask me. They are putting ALL their eggs in lambda crossovers and i think to use that as an excuse to completely ignore vans is again reactionary and short sighted. But that is how GM works.

Here's a market segment in dire need of update that GM and Ford are ignoring. They need to update their full size / cargo vans for better mpg and handling etc. and such before toyota gets in on that also.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

I don't think we will see a wholesale abandonment of Zeta.

We've lost 1 and 1 more potential probably for reasons other than what certain posters here attribute.

Reuss wanting to develop a hybrid version of the platform is reason enough for hope.

[Guest YellowJacket894]

I don't think we will see a wholesale abandonment of Zeta.

We've lost 1 and 1 more potential probably for reasons other than what certain posters here attribute.

The Impala is pretty much gone, we can pretty much say this. But, let me guess: the Buick Zeta is next on the chopping block, right?

Reuss wanting to develop a hybrid version of the platform is reason enough for hope.

I hope so.

[daves87rs]

MORE Models!

That is all I have to say.

[knightfan26917]

It's the lack of logic about all of this which shocks me most.

Thing is ... it doesn't shock me anymore....

Cort:34swm."Mr Monte Carlo.Mr Road Trip".pig valve&pacemaker

CDshowcase=www.WRMN1410.com*SATURDAY.january26*2p-5p.and.8p-11p.CENTRAL

"Don't look now, things just got worse" ... Dog's Eye View ... 'Everything Falls Apart'

[2005 EquinoxLS]

GM will make whatever product is going to sell the best. Thats just buisness. Hopefully they can get the right mix of AWD,FWD,and RWD vehicles to please most people. Most people attrubute RWD with poor snow handling. That can and cant be true. The 2 RWDs I have prove this. One is real good and the other slides around with the slightest provocation. Since most of the country gets snow at one time or another it is reasonable that they will want to make more FWD and AWD vehicles. If they can prove that RWD works in snow then they will make them. Hopefully people understand what I am saying.

[regfootball]

the obstacle to buying a RWD biased car is removed when you simply offer AWD as an option.

[Camino LS6]

the obstacle to buying a RWD biased car is removed when you simply learn to drive in snow.

Fixed. :AH-HA_wink:

[Dsuupr]

Those at GM didn't say they where going to drop RWD cars competely. They just stated they will drop other Zeta models for cafe reasons. They have been working on smaller rear wheel drive vehicles which could easily create the same entertainment as a Zeta, with better gas mileage.

[Camino LS6]

Last night I watched the Senate subcommitee debating ammendments to the "Climate Change" bill on C-span.

They aren't going to stop until this industry is dead.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Last night I watched the Senate subcommitee debating ammendments to the "Climate Change" bill on C-span.

They aren't going to stop until this industry is dead.

Well, that is the point isn't it?

It's not about saving the environment.

If it were, Congress would seek to limit driving habits instead of promoting efficiency. They would also seek to help families buy newer more efficient cars instead of forcing the prices up $6000. They would invest in public transit and alternative fuels instead of funding a war for oil.

Etc, etc.

[ZL-1]

Those at GM didn't say they where going to drop RWD cars competely. They just stated they will drop other Zeta models for cafe reasons. They have been working on smaller rear wheel drive vehicles which could easily create the same entertainment as a Zeta, with better gas mileage.

Yay! A voice of reason, at last!

[Camino LS6]

Those at GM didn't say they where going to drop RWD cars competely. They just stated they will drop other Zeta models for cafe reasons. They have been working on smaller rear wheel drive vehicles which could easily create the same entertainment as a Zeta, with better gas mileage.

Maybe.

Someday.

If we are lucky.

I am really not interested in anything smaller than zeta though, so we'll see what actually makes it to market. Then I'll know what I'm going to do.

[Camino LS6]

Well, that is the point isn't it?

It's not about saving the environment.

If it were, Congress would seek to limit driving habits instead of promoting efficiency. They would also seek to help families buy newer more efficient cars instead of forcing the prices up $6000. They would invest in public transit and alternative fuels instead of funding a war for oil.

Etc, etc.

This bill is all about"carbon". Here's a highlight:

-They are setting emissions standards all the way to 2050

- The limits are set according to a "study" done by rabid environmentalists.

- The study claims that the limits are reachable if

1) Certain now non-existant technology is developed

2) 115 new Nuclear plants come on line by 2015

There was much more silliness in all of it, but I could only stand to watch so much.