GME says no to new Calibra

[Guest YellowJacket894]

As far as Zeta, there may be all sorts of reasons for it's demise, but weight has got to be one of them. Several hundred thousand 2 ton sedans just don't help GM's CAFE efforts. In fact a two ton Camaro won't help much either with that.

The whole idea of a platform that GM can build full-size, rear-drive cars with some form of a V8 option with shouldn't be tossed aside. Address the weight issues with the next-generation Zeta platform (Zeta II) and whatever other issues that it currently faces. Don't just toss it aside, use it for what you can while you have it and then introduce the next version that's better, lighter, more efficient when Zeta is due to be replaced in the next five-years by new models. It's just common sense.

[Camino LS6]

All of this is a question of balance. All of any type of car or truck need not disappear completely to make it work.

While zeta may not support an ideal Camaro, it is perfect for other applications.

(and a zeta Camaro would make me smile if it were in my garage).

[Chazman]

The Camaro and the Impala are considered Zeta II, internally. Weight has always been a problem with Zeta.

[Chazman]

While zeta may not support an ideal Camaro, it is perfect for other applications.

Agreed. The Impala would have been pretty sweet.

[Guest YellowJacket894]

The Camaro and the Impala are considered Zeta II, internally. Weight has always been a problem with Zeta.

Regardless of what Zeta is known as internally, there is a way to engineer out the bugs so Zeta can be used in more cars. If it means starting over with a totally clean sheet of paper, then by all means do so. The idea isn't a bad one, it never was in the first place.

All of this is a question of balance. All of any type of car or truck need not disappear completely to make it work.

While zeta may not support an ideal Camaro, it is perfect for other applications.

Zeta is way too valuable of a platform to just be thrown away like an old, ripped up t-shirt.

(and a zeta Camaro would make me smile if it were in my garage).

I know it already makes me grin every time I just think about it. And I don't even have the car yet.

[Camino LS6]

I may just toss the idea of a fully-realized, and thought out article and post what I have later tonight to let you guys tear into it.

[z28luvr01]

Z and I were discussing some CAFE possibilities on AIM earlier today in which Zeta provided an advantage in the race to meet CAFE. I'll let him post the details, but with a little imagination it is easy to see how zeta can be turned from a liability into an asset as far as CAFE goes.

Wow, what a thread. I have our IM conversation saved and will post it tomorrow when I get in. My meeting lasted a LOT longer than I expected.

I think we should all take a step back for a while. It's pretty heated in here. The CAFE regs are here, the CO₂ emission regs are coming, and GM as well as the rest of the industry needs to figure out the best way to deal with them, while getting a decent ROI on Zeta and not asking too much of Alpha. What PCS has done (as said by Camino) is make us aware of the internal struggles at GM with regard to how to satisfy both conditions. Love him or hate him, he's just a messenger (self appointed or otherwise) from one of the dueling factions and shouldn't be tarred and feathered. I don't think he takes any joy in being the cause of every GM brand outside of Chevy, Saturn Caddy, and Opel dying. He might enjoy Holden's death a bit, but even that's debatable. These ideas aren't his own, but he must carry them out. And truth be told, he hasn't done anything up to this point to even warrant a warning, much less a banning. I keep reading Buickman comparisons, yet when did Buickman ever start "Happy Birthday" threads in the Lounge? Also, instead of having a public intervention, send us a PM. We'll consult over it and respond appropriately.

[Intrepidation]

Can't we all just get along? Group hug

[Camino LS6]

My rough draft article is here:

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...t=0#entry362187

Edit it as you see fit. Let's finish this article as a C&G consensus.

Have fun, but be serious.

[Chazman]

Regardless of what Zeta is known as internally, there is a way to engineer out the bugs so Zeta can be used in more cars. If it means starting over with a totally clean sheet of paper, then by all means do so. The idea isn't a bad one, it never was in the first place.

.

Honestly, Zeta is not as flexible as people think. The Camaro, which will be GTO sized and probably out weigh it (perhaps by a LARGE margin), is about as small as Zeta can go. Zeta is a large car architecture and even a clean sheet wouldn't give many gains regarding decreased weight or smaller vehicle dimensions. Alpha hopefully will.

[buyacargetacheck]

Some of you need to get a life. Or at least a squeeze. Wrapping yourself up in a "brand" that you have no control over and whose seeds of destruction were sewn long before many of you were born is madness. Our car culture is coming to a slow, drawn-out end very soon. Many of you are disappointed and will continue to be disappointed.

If PCS really is the GM insider he says he is why in the f..k would any of you dunderheads chase him off? Not too bright. Not too bright.

[Intrepidation]

Some of you need to get a life. Or at least a squeeze. Wrapping yourself up in a "brand" that you have no control over and whose seeds of destruction were sewn long before many of you were born is madness. Our car culture is coming to a slow, drawn-out end very soon. Many of you are disappointed and will continue to be disappointed.

If PCS really is the GM insider he says he is why in the f..k would any of you dunderheads chase him off? Not too bright. Not too bright.

I do wish you would f..k off. PCS contributes meaningful material, all you do is spew crap from your mouth.

Edited January 29, 2008 by Dodgefan

[Duncan]

Some of you need to get a life. Or at least a squeeze. Wrapping yourself up in a "brand" that you have no control over and whose seeds of destruction were sewn long before many of you were born is madness. Our car culture is coming to a slow, drawn-out end very soon. Many of you are disappointed and will continue to be disappointed.

And why, pray tell, are you here?

I like cars, for instance. How about you?

[regfootball]

Internal combustion engines can have an unlimited future with renewable alternative fuels.

yes. sadly, the press is out to bad mouth things like ethanol. front page of paper today? 'ethanol production risks groundwater supply' or something. basically saying we'll use up all our wate making ethanol. so the lierals and lefties and press are out to kill alt. fuels.

[Duncan]

yes. sadly, the press is out to bad mouth things like ethanol. front page of paper today? 'ethanol production risks groundwater supply' or something. basically saying we'll use up all our wate making ethanol. so the lierals and lefties and press are out to kill alt. fuels.

I'm not sure it's the liberals, actually - the massive oil conglomerates might have something to do with that, too.

They're not exactly in the leadership position on ethanol, and their production system doesn't lend itself well to ethanol either. So they've got quite a bit to lose if this country starts switching away from oil. And it certainly wouldn't be the first time they've mounted an "alternate" PR campaign in their own interest. Wrap that in a would-be "green" message (like the groundwater contamination example), and it starts to gain traction.

Gotta look at both sides of these issues, you know?

[thegriffon]

Wow! I give a hint about using zeta to benefit the CAFE numbers and you guys hone right in on the target!

Yes 1/2 ton pickups and SUVs should be the targets along with dumping a few other things like COL?Canyon and TB/Envoy.

I've started working up a zeta/CAFE game plan article/opinion piece, but by the time I get it done, you guys will have figured it all out already.

Bottom line: the biggest problem for GM meeting CAFE isn't zeta, but the trucks and SUVs.

The biggest problem is getting people to buy the smaller, more efficient trucks. A good, affordable, fuel efficient Colorado replacement which sells anywhere near the Tacoma is essential, as is a NA version of the Montana (get in quick and corner the market before Chrysler or Toyota can develop something in this class) and a dedicated Chevy LCV like Opel's Combo that will sell in volume, but can use small fuel-efficient engines such as the 1.4 and 1.6 turbos. Other needs—proper midsize crossovers to replace the Equinox and Torrent that addresses the weight issues of both the latest Thetas and the Lambdas, offer much improved economy and sell in the same volume as the Edge and Highlander. A fwd version of the 2.9 L four-cylinder as a more economical base engine in the crossover SUVs, instead of the OHV V6 (note Toyota will be using its 2.7 L in the Venza wagon and midsize crossovers).

[thegriffon]

I think we all know GM is going to have to make major changes to it's product programs to meet CAFE and European CO2 regulations, however most of us lament the possible death of performance cars such as the G8, and mothballing of the Northstar replacement, while PCS seems to gloat about it. Too often his tone is "HAHA you lose!", rather than the regret and commiseration that I think more people would expect or appreciate from a true enthusiast. There is apparently no desire to explore what measures may be taken to save the DT7, revive Pontiac, or improve the efficiency of larger, rwd vehicles, rather what we hear (intentionally or not) is "S—w you we're killing everything. We don't want to hear about it, we don't want the strategy board to find out it may actually be possible." Too often his given reasons are not "What's good for GM", but the malicious desire to undermine Holden and get rid of any mid-large rwd program.

[ZL-1]

As far as Zeta, there may be all sorts of reasons for it's demise, but weight has got to be one of them. Several hundred thousand 2 ton sedans just don't help GM's CAFE efforts. In fact a two ton Camaro won't help much either.

I think that's the key of part of the CAFE debate within GM. Not RWD vs FWD in general, but Zeta vs other alternatives.

Edited January 29, 2008 by ZL-1

[Chazman]

I can also add that when Holden did the Torana concept, it got the attention of alot of people at the very top of GM. Not so much for the car itself, but more for it's conceptual architecture. Those may have been the seeds of what will become Alpha.

There were people within GM though, such as I believe Lori Queen, who adamantly opposed any sort of premium small/medium sized car for NA. This sort of thinking figured that Americans will either buy a cheap little, FWD, sh!tbox, or a large premium car. Funny, since the US is BMW's largest market for the 3. Anyway, this conceptual platform was killed dead.

Regarding the Camaro. There was VERY serious consideration in basing Camaro off of this smaller architecture, as well as other vehicles.

In the end, Zeta seemed like the cheaper choice for Camaro - at the time, that is.

I think alot of these people might be rethinking their decisions right now, if they could go back in time. We'd probably be ready to see the launch of a a whole family of cool and fun to drive, CAFE friendly, RWD cars right now, rather than the implosion of RWD which we're seeing with Zeta.

Edited January 29, 2008 by Chazman

[Camino LS6]

I can also add that when Holden did the Torana concept, it got the attention of alot of people at the very top of GM. Not so much for the car itself, but more for it's conceptual architecture. Those may have been the seeds of what will become Alpha.

There were people within GM though, such as I believe Lori Queen, who adamantly opposed any sort of premium small/medium sized car for NA. This sort of thinking figured that Americans will either buy a cheap little, FWD, sh!tbox, or a large premium car. Funny, since the US is BMW's largest market for the 3. Anyway, this conceptual platform was killed dead.

Regarding the Camaro. There was VERY serious consideration in basing Camaro off of this smaller architecture, as well as other vehicles.

In the end, Zeta seemed like the cheaper choice for Camaro - at the time, that is.

I think alot of these people might be rethinking their decisions right now, if they could go back in time. We'd probably be ready to see the launch of a a whole family of cool and fun to drive, CAFE friendly, RWD cars right now, rather than the implosion of RWD which we're seeing with Zeta.

The thinking just has to shift. Zeta is an extremely viable platform for applications other than Camaro. Alpha could have a great future, but we should get the zetas now. A sixth gen Camaro on Alpha sounds perfect to me as a place to begin.

[thegriffon]

Just because the spokesperson for those opposed to Zeta bases his argument on non-business reasons doesn't mean Zeta is "an extremely viable platform." The original Zeta architecture had to be redesigned to meet the cost objectives of GMNA—a midsize Zeta sedan that cost just as much as a CTS was not going to fly. It may be that Zeta would have to be redesigned again to remain viable under the new CAFE targets. That's no reason to abandon a more affordable rwd architecture for midsize–large cars and crossovers however. CAFE and European CO2 limits may restrict volume in those markets, but India, China, Russia, Australia, the Middle East etc., have no such restrictions. Despite higher fuel prices (roughly $US6 a gallon for regular unleaded, more for E10 or diesel), sales of Commodore V8s in Australia have actually risen. If that means the PA has to be built in China, or half of all Grand Prixs wear Holden badges, then so be it if the development costs can then be spread over two or three times as many vehicles.

An affordable range of rwd performance models would cast as big a halo over GM as its green vehicle initiatives. The motoring press is dominated by enthusiasts. A well engineered Pontiac Tempest would inspire more confidence in and enthusiasm for GM than any 600 hp "halo car" ever could. Conversely to kill a brand such as Holden or Pontiac would damage GM's reputation dramatically. Confidence in the remaining brands, in GM's management and engineering ability, in lost loyalty (indeed, the enmity) of disaffected fans would far outweigh the benefits perceived by Wall Street and proponents of brand rationalization within GM.

Edited January 29, 2008 by thegriffon

[turbo200]

Confidence in the remaining brands, in GM's management and engineering ability, in lost loyalty (indeed, the enmity) of disaffected fans would far outweigh the benefits perceived by Wall Street and proponents of brand rationalization within GM.

attaining that confidence is what seperates Toyota from GM. down to the bottom, every line that comes out of sensible people is one of respect for Toyota's work, engineering, and future forecast. The same can't be said of GM, especially when even a car GM is producing is contantly thrown into a shadow of doubt: VOLT.

And I totally agree with every single word you said.

Edited January 29, 2008 by turbo200

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Just trust Rick and Bob at this point as they have made few misakes compared to past leaders. We should be glad in this time of change we have them and a very empowered staff of engineers at GM now.

I agree...

I think Rick and Bob have showed us that they know how to lead the empire back to the front and I think they will continue to do that with a combination of great products.

COMMENTS:

1) Wildcat has the best posts in this thread so far IMO... Spot on!

2) If GM does so much as phase out 1 more division, I will abandon the corporation for good. If this were 2005 and GM was financially screwed, then I might be able to accept it. But as of now, there is simply NO reason that another division should be phased out. If anything, the more competitive/fragmenting market and emerging alternative fuels gives GM that many more outlets for each of it's divisions to FOCUS on.

3) Likewise, if GM doesn't offer me a RWD V8 car, I will probably take my business elsewhere. There is no reason that V8's can't be offered in the face of CAFE. GM just won't be able to offer them in every car and truck they make. But seriously, does a FWD Impala really need a mass production V8? Does an H3 or Colorado or Canyon really need a V8, if a V6 that is just as powerful becomes available? However, do Cadillacs and sports cars need V8s? ABSOLUTELY! Does Pontiac need at least one model with a V8? You bet your ass it does.

4) Alternative fuels will make internal combustion viable for a VERY long time if not indefinitely. Hydrogen is the key to this. I'd rather die than drive an electric car... A hybrid I can handle, but I don't need a golf cart.

5) PCS shouldn't be banned because he hasn't given us a reason to ban him. However, it would be nice if he would stop casting gloom and doom all over the board. Things were finally looking up for GM again and now he comes around and takes a sh*t on everything. It's just not cool, but at the same time, I don't think he realizes what kind of effect he has on the people here. I never realized how negative I made the place back in the not to distant past until I stepped back and took a look.

6) GM, you will be getting my first new car purchase in the form of a Camaro, G8 ST or G8. Yes, initially I did not like the G8, but I'm willing to give it a second chance if it means the very survival of Pontiac. However, if you go the route of GME, you'll not see another purchase from me for a long time.

Edited January 29, 2008 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[Drew Dowdell]

5) PCS shouldn't be banned because he hasn't given us a reason to ban him. However, it would be nice if he would stop casting gloom and doom all over the board. Things were finally looking up for GM again and now he comes around and takes a sh*t on everything. It's just not cool, but at the same time, I don't think he realizes what kind of effect he has on the people here. I never realized how negative I made the place back in the not to distant past until I stepped back and took a look.

On the contrary, I think he realizes exactly the kind of effect he has on people here.

Someone bringing bad news is fine.

Someone bringing bad news while tap dancing at the front of a ticker taped marching band procession because he knows it will irritate the receivers of said bad news. completely different.

[rambaran]

On the contrary, I think he realizes exactly the kind of effect he has on people here.

Someone bringing bad news is fine.

Someone bringing bad news while tap dancing at the front of a ticker taped marching band procession because he knows it will irritate the receivers of said bad news. completely different.

love him or hate him, pcs is making things interesting. he's allowed to have his opinions, and everyone else is allowed to agree/disagree. but the whole process is far from boring. those who refuse to change with the times get left behind, right?

[hyperv6]

On the contrary, I think he realizes exactly the kind of effect he has on people here.

Someone bringing bad news is fine.

Someone bringing bad news while tap dancing at the front of a ticker taped marching band procession because he knows it will irritate the receivers of said bad news. completely different.

Kind of like a reflection of what ills much society anymore. To many people thinking of themselves behind a keyboard or steerring wheel and too often not respecting others.

In the old days before when everything was done face to face someone would be taking a swing.

Those of us on this web site have often disagree and take sides but we also know when to back off and give some space. Those in the past who like to irritate or bully have moved on. I don't care who you are what or who you know there is little space here for borish behavior. That is what makes this web site better than most out there.

Because of how informed most here are and the respect we give is why C&G stands out from all of the other sites.

Edited January 29, 2008 by hyperv6

[enzl]

As someone who can occassionally iritate, I think we have to be careful about curtailing opinions. While we can have heated exchanges that detract from the information being shared (guilty as charged)--I find its the contrarians among us that tend to dig into the issues facing GM and the industry at large.

I have a gut feeling that the Zeta rumors are merely saber-rattling by GM to squeeze the CAW into accepting a lower volume commitment or job cuts or both.

It just doesn't make sense to have just the Camaro made in the US---even the most optimistic C+Ger knows that more than 100k vehicles need to be made at Oshawa--to me, the obvious move is to experiment with the Aussie imports, then move their production after judging the market-between the g8, ST + Crewman, another factory filling set of vehicles seem to be readily available--at least 1 of 2 Oshawas, in any case.

Just my .02

[Camino LS6]

Great post Enzl!

And... damn... we agree again. :AH-HA_wink:

[Guest YellowJacket894]

Some of you need to get a life. Or at least a squeeze. Wrapping yourself up in a "brand" that you have no control over and whose seeds of destruction were sewn long before many of you were born is madness. Our car culture is coming to a slow, drawn-out end very soon. Many of you are disappointed and will continue to be disappointed.

If PCS really is the GM insider he says he is why in the f..k would any of you dunderheads chase him off? Not too bright. Not too bright.

I'll tell you what's "not too bright:" your mouth. I feel that you fail to realize that we are more than loyal enthusiasts, we're loyal customers as well. Not only have we defended the company when it seemed as if they didn't have a single leg to stand on, we drive their products daily and appreciate them and defended them just as we do the company that made them. And when it's time to make a new car purchase, we don't look elsewhere first, we go to the company we stand by.

If GM abandons us one by one, we abandon GM. Look at what happened to Olds customers when GM scrapped that: they went elsewhere or just bought another used Olds. In the end, GM cannot afford anything of the sort, for a second time, for a third time, for a fourth, and so on. With each division they pick off, they do damage to their sales. Killing off Oldsmobile didn't help increase market share.

We, the loyal GM enthusiasts, are a customer base that I know GM would like to add to and that also cannot be detracted from. I shouldn't have to say this again, case closed. Failure to even consider what I've just said proves a fatal degree of ignorance.

GM has the talent within it's halls to make each and every one of it's brands focused, very profitable, and very aspirational, in spite of regulations that change with the moon. They have the talent to make any car they think about a reality. There are very talented designers and engineers at GM. The limits aren't as tight as they may appear (but, yes, they aren't exactly elastic). You can't tell me that it's not true. But you can place blame for each division of GM and each program the company works to develop finding problems and woe mainly due to two different factors: 1.) internal disruptions from executives and beancounters at the top of the company and 2.) the dealers. For every one executive who is for a certain program coming to light, you more than often have just as many against it as well as the beancounters to back them up. And the dealers are constantly asking and demanding products that not only compete with Honda down the road, but Chevrolet as well. This is how we've wound up with the Pontiac G5, as well as other Pontiacs like the G3 and Torrent. This leads to overlap and over saturation of the market. It doesn't help GM, it only hurts them. If GM didn't build these cars in the first place, and focused on it's current all rear-drive plan years ago, anyone considering axing Pontiac would be treated as ludicrous. Pontiac would have been much more successful then and now.

But it's hard to solve GM's internal imbalance, for as long as there has been GM, the company has had a history of fighting between divisions, executives, and the beancounters who try to make the company and it's products more cost efficient (and more than often fail horribly).

GM needs to be tighter and get its internal politics under control.

Edited January 30, 2008 by YellowJacket894

[hyperv6]

As someone who can occassionally iritate, I think we have to be careful about curtailing opinions. While we can have heated exchanges that detract from the information being shared (guilty as charged)--I find its the contrarians among us that tend to dig into the issues facing GM and the industry at large.

I have a gut feeling that the Zeta rumors are merely saber-rattling by GM to squeeze the CAW into accepting a lower volume commitment or job cuts or both.

It just doesn't make sense to have just the Camaro made in the US---even the most optimistic C+Ger knows that more than 100k vehicles need to be made at Oshawa--to me, the obvious move is to experiment with the Aussie imports, then move their production after judging the market-between the g8, ST + Crewman, another factory filling set of vehicles seem to be readily available--at least 1 of 2 Oshawas, in any case.

Just my .02

I agree with you on the Union as a factor. But will all the cars return including the Impala or will we only see a Caddy and Buick?

I would assume they would go with the Zeta cars that are near complete. Lets face it the Alpha will not be avaialble for 4-5yeats top on a accelerated program. GM will need something to sell. Besides the 35 MPG is still 12 years off still giving them time to bring the Alpha to market to provide a better suited vehicle to deal with it.

I just don't see much more development on the Zeta as why put money in the heavy platform when it could go to the new platform. What they have can carry them into the future for 5-6 years and not go stale.

I do see some models may not come back like the GTO and Monaro as a Camaro in place can be built and exported with little effort. Scott Settlmire made a point to say the Camaro was going to be exported. He did not say to what extent but this one car could do the duity and add many more cars to the Camaro line if they do lose the Impala for good. I think Scott made a point to say export as it will amount to much more than what they have done in the past. Remember Chevy is now a world brand.

If one would just figure exports to Europe, Austrailia, Middle East, China, Even a hand full to south America and Japan the numbers could add up. I know they would not go to all thsoe markets but they are viable and open if needed.

Also what can be salvaged from Zeta for future product. Can some be adapted to larger Alpha models? Can new Pick Ups be based on this platform?

I see even some love volume cars from Cadillac still living on Zeta after 35 MPG as not all Cadillacs will get 35 MPG. At a low volume and higher price they can get away with some larger cars. In their case it is expected.

It will be interesting to see what GM settles on as at this point nothing is in stone and anything can still happen. I can say we will see product development like wh have never seen from the auto makers in the next 12 years.

I can promise you we will see more new models and new kinds or types of vehicles we never expected to ever see. Many will be driven by drive trains with technology unthinkable 5 years ago. and most will be made of materials we never though possible for the average car buyer.

All the cards are on the table.

[Camino LS6]

Don't forget about the accellerating development of alternative fuels.

Our choices can widen again if they meet their promise.

[hyperv6]

Don't forget about the accellerating development of alternative fuels.

Our choices can widen again if they meet their promise.

What the heck....We could always lengthen the front clip and stuff in the steam power plant from the experimental 1969 GP Pontiac still has. It needs a rebuild but I am game.

At least Jay Leno would buy one.

[Chazman]

5) PCS shouldn't be banned because he hasn't given us a reason to ban him.

Who's saying he should be banned? I find his posts pretty interesting. I don't always agree with him, and I can see how he can upset people, but I read his posts with interest.

Lookit, on most sites I go to, 80% of the posts are simply mindless background noise. No substance. No thought, (let alone spelling and sentence structure). I simply skip over them. Banning someone because they are provocative is silly. The whole purpose of boards like this is to discuss, debate and yes, - even argue.

[Croc]

Who's saying he should be banned? I find his posts pretty interesting. I don't always agree with him, and I can see how he can upset people, but I read his posts with interest.

Lookit, on most sites I go to, 80% of the posts are simply mindless background noise. No substance. No thought, (let alone spelling and sentence structure). I simply skip over them. Banning someone because they are provocative is silly. The whole purpose of boards like this is to discuss, debate and yes, - even argue.

I agree. I think it's the WAY PCS chooses to dance with glee at every bit of bad (for us) news, though, that pisses people off. Back in my mod days I prolly would've issues him a warning or two, but heck, I assume the mods are taking care of it however they do that these days.

His posts are interesting, but I don't pay too much heed to them.

[thegriffon]

Don't forget about the accellerating development of alternative fuels.

Our choices can widen again if they meet their promise.

No, they won't. As I keep explaining, automakers will get practically no credit for any flexible-fuel vehicle capable of running on CNG, bio-diesel, ethanol or butanol. Until hydrogen fuel cells power the majority of vehicles sold, alternative fu8els will make no impact on vehicles which can be sold.

[thegriffon]

That's what you get from a government which relies on fuel economy standards instead of consumer incentives (e.g. penalizing the use of petroleum-based fuels).

[Drew Dowdell]

As someone who can occassionally iritate, I think we have to be careful about curtailing opinions. While we can have heated exchanges that detract from the information being shared (guilty as charged)--I find its the contrarians among us that tend to dig into the issues facing GM and the industry at large.

I have a gut feeling that the Zeta rumors are merely saber-rattling by GM to squeeze the CAW into accepting a lower volume commitment or job cuts or both.

It just doesn't make sense to have just the Camaro made in the US---even the most optimistic C+Ger knows that more than 100k vehicles need to be made at Oshawa--to me, the obvious move is to experiment with the Aussie imports, then move their production after judging the market-between the g8, ST + Crewman, another factory filling set of vehicles seem to be readily available--at least 1 of 2 Oshawas, in any case.

Just my .02

While I usually disagree with what you are saying, your motivation is not malicious, and as such I'll defend to the end your right to to say your piece.

[Camino LS6]

No, they won't. As I keep explaining, automakers will get practically no credit for any flexible-fuel vehicle capable of running on CNG, bio-diesel, ethanol or butanol. Until hydrogen fuel cells power the majority of vehicles sold, alternative fu8els will make no impact on vehicles which can be sold.

I understand your point and agree that the government has taken a wholly wrong approach to the issue via the already failed notion of CAFE. However, given the fact that CAFE cannot solve the problem, the government will be forced to re-visit the issue as reliance on oil becomes ever more onerous. I guarantee that eventually(likely very,very, late to the game) , our government will literally force us to use alternative fuels. There simply is no other option in the long term. I'd like to see us get ahead of all of that and will vote accordingly.

[daves87rs]

It's time for GM to actually put the RWD cars on the market and see how they sell inthe real world instead of second- guessing themselves ahead of the game.

I'm all for killing the Colorado/Canyon and Trailblazer/Envoy in favor of zetas.