Todd Lassa: GM and Ford's rear-wheel-drive strategies

[turbo200]

Absolutely Reg. This is something I didn't elaborate enough on earlier in one of my posts, but the the driving experience really is the completion of the package when it comes to a car. And one of the major driving forces for why so many people in America, but especially in urban parts of the country have gravitated towards more solid driving experiences/packages.

I just can't emphasize enough how the driving experience is really the last part, the clincher, the climax. First thing is you see the car, you envision yourself in it, you eihter fall head over heals, or you're just okay with it. you wouldn't be looking at a car that's at least passable in your eyes.

You can be the kind of driver to pore over the exterior lines, interior feel, or maybe not. Maybe you look at the storage, whatever, but you climb in and you feel how it fits you.

The last thing that happens is your hand touches the wheel, you wanna go for a spin. This is the last and most crucial part of the sell, the drive. As AMericans we've been fortunate to be able to experience both fun and powerful cars that have us spoiled.

But when it comes to driving experiences, Americans have historically lagged. Now fast forward to today and a lot of American cars offer solid driving experiences, but it wasn't too long ago when sloppy and slushy were common descriptives applied to American makes.

So the driving experience is a huge part of the sell. Power delivery, suspension stability, brake strength, steering feel.........the better you can get at these the more chances you have of selling your car. Of course, getting them in the car is the clincher. And for those two things I think the G8 will do very well.

[The O.C.]

read winding roads review of the g8......aurora had 25hz chassis stiffness.....g8 is 55hz....over 2 times as stiff (some of you may like that!)

anyways......crash safety and rock solid feel take precedence in this country....and there is only so much high strength steel or aluminum they can be willing to pay for too.

the vault like chassis that mags have been praising for good steering and suspension, that is how you get it.

what are you gonna sacrifice? Look under the hood of a nissan rogue and look at how flimsy all the brackets etc are. now look under the hood of a NA designed domestic car......stout components. lean agaist the rear fender of an altima and feel it flex. now lean against the fender of something else.

you can only remove weight down to a point. i am sure toyota did that with their tundra tailgate. the vue weight is out of hand, but i don't think the g8 is all that much, considering the length, wheelbase, and track dimensions. the g8 is a LARGE LARGE car!

v6 g8 for those who don't want to get in trouble with the 360hp + especially in winter.

C'mon Reg......there's no statistical or factual evidence I've ever seen to demonstrate that the imports, for example a Camry or Accord, which is a couple-hundred pounds lighter than a comparably-equipped Malibu or AURA is in any way more "fragile", less "stout", or more "flexible" than the heavier GM products.

G8 and CTS both are more midsize in my mind......but both weigh around 4,000lbs.......heavy for their respective classes......as is Malibu/AURA, and as you mentioned, VUE. Lamdas are as well......all of them at or slightly over 5,000lbs.

I'm not debating the fact that these GM products drive with a feeling of solidity and quality, but others feel just as solid but don't suffer the setbacks in performance and fuel economy that GM is having to compensate for because of their heavier products......

[turbo200]

not sure where the G8 fits in on the EPA guidelines [?} regarding midsize/fullsize, but just based on my experience the G8 was as large as the full-size rated Accord and bigger than a Maxima. It felt as comfortable and spacious as the Accord, perhaps the seats were even more comfortable. the Maxima, current gen, is far behind both in this respect.

G8's drive, being that its RWD, I think will win over many buyers, and definitely through a combination of solid chassis, great steering feel, neutral handling, etc. But that's not what you're saying.

For the weight of the car, with the G8 at least, I think it is a little closer to being reasonable, since it is much much larger inside than a Malibu.

[The O.C.]

not sure where the G8 fits in on the EPA guidelines [?} regarding midsize/fullsize, but just based on my experience the G8 was as large as the full-size rated Accord and bigger than a Maxima. It felt as comfortable and spacious as the Accord, perhaps the seats were even more comfortable. the Maxima, current gen, is far behind both in this respect.

G8's drive, being that its RWD, I think will win over many buyers, and definitely through a combination of solid chassis, great steering feel, neutral handling, etc. But that's not what you're saying.

For the weight of the car, with the G8 at least, I think it is a little closer to being reasonable, since it is much much larger inside than a Malibu.

I tend to categorize cars like the Malibu, Accord, Camry, CTS, even G8 as midsize products........versus cars such as the Lucerne, DTS, Avalon that appear to me as full-size cars. I'd most likely put the Taurus/Sable in the full-size category as well.....

That's just my informal opinion......

I won't harp on the G8's weight anymore.....it's a great product in any event.

The only time recently it's really pissed me off was the CTS.......if that car weighed 200-300 lbs less, the 300hp DI V6 would be way more sparkling in that car. As it is, a base 328i and a base C300, both with about only 230hp will run with the over-300hp CTS......

I shudder to think that an even heavier CTS-v might not run all that much faster than a 300hp 3-series or a 330hp G37.......(Caddy is quoting a mid-4sec 0-60 for the new v-Series......)

[Satty]

The only time recently it's really pissed me off was the CTS.......if that car weighed 200-300 lbs less, the 300hp DI V6 would be way more sparkling in that car.

Maybe the driver and his passengers just need to diet.

[regfootball]

C'mon Reg......there's no statistical or factual evidence I've ever seen to demonstrate that the imports, for example a Camry or Accord, which is a couple-hundred pounds lighter than a comparably-equipped Malibu or AURA is in any way more "fragile", less "stout", or more "flexible" than the heavier GM products.

G8 and CTS both are more midsize in my mind......but both weigh around 4,000lbs.......heavy for their respective classes......as is Malibu/AURA, and as you mentioned, VUE. Lamdas are as well......all of them at or slightly over 5,000lbs.

I'm not debating the fact that these GM products drive with a feeling of solidity and quality, but others feel just as solid but don't suffer the setbacks in performance and fuel economy that GM is having to compensate for because of their heavier products......

drive a UJS a few winters and you understand after a few pothole freeze/thaw cycles how poorly the cheap UJS's stack up. The UJS's feel solid for awhile, but after having a couple get pounded to $h! in the winters, I don't mind carrying a few extra pounds.

One figure folks also gloss over when they dissect why a car is so heavy. WIDTH probably has more of a factor than length. It is harder to get structural stiffness to a desired level if the car is wider. The Epsilons are way too narrow yet are heavy. The CTS is a decently wide car, probably just about ok. The Zeta g8 is nice and wide, so there is that much more chassis to engineer. A car that is 70 inches wide, going to one that is 76 inches wide, the car is 6" wider, or like 8 or 9 percent wider. So I would fully expect it be a good 10% more in weight. So to me, a 3600 pound epsilon with the HF v6 going to a 4000 pound RWD much wider G8 is not a big deal. Plus, the G8 is larger than the Catera, but the Catera was not really lighter.

The g8 chassis is engineered to accept a level of engine and suspension performance the Epsilons cannot muster. It also can accept a performance level no accord can muster. The Accord can perform at an 8/10 level of the g8 chassis.....and that's fine because most folks do not exceed that performance level.

The Accord is about the only light UJS I could gain trust in as being able to withstand heavy pounding over a 5 year cycle, because only for the reason of having a trust level with Honda's engineering and products. I would not trust a Camry or Altima to withstand that.

Also, if you look at the weight specs on the Accord v6, you notice its not all that light anyways. The 4 cylinder UJS's keep their weight down pretty well, but stuff a v6 in the chassis engineered mostly for 4 cylinder application and you understand why the Altimas of the world are so light. Someone buying a Zeta is not going to accept the light duty nature of the 4 cylinder UJS platform.

The Germans are the worst offenders of weight in cars, yet no one ever likes to call them on the carpet for it. The US makes make a heavier car and get ripped for it. How can a Q7 Audi (audi, vw, mercedes, bmw...lots of pork there) can weight as much as a suburban, or a touareg weigh as much as it does for having no space inside? Let's talk about THAT for once.

BMW 135i.....3400 pounds and I bet even the tiniest spinner chick is uncomfortable in the backseat. If that's not a porky car,........

a 4000 pound g8 is positively light in comparison to something like a porky 135.

Edited March 30, 2008 by regfootball

[smk4565]

The Germans are the worst offenders of weight in cars, yet no one ever likes to call them on the carpet for it. The US makes make a heavier car and get ripped for it. How can a Q7 Audi (audi, vw, mercedes, bmw...lots of pork there) can weight as much as a suburban, or a touareg weigh as much as it does for having no space inside? Let's talk about THAT for once.

BMW 135i.....3400 pounds and I bet even the tiniest spinner chick is uncomfortable in the backseat. If that's not a porky car,........

a 4000 pound g8 is positively light in comparison to something like a porky 135.

The 135i does 0-60 in 4.7 seconds. Personally I find it too small and a little ugly, but the G8 with it's big 6 liter engine can't do that, the GXP version won't either.

Here are the weights what you call heavy Germans (each car with an automatic, rear drive)

535i: 3703 pounds

E350: 3740 pounds

550i: 3803 pounds

CTS: 3874 pounds

G8 V6: 3885 pounds

E550: 3885 pounds

Looks like the CTS is 134 lbs more than the Benz and 171 lbs more than the BMW. A Jaguar XJ which is over 200 inches long is only 3770 pounds, ah the benefits of aluminum. The G8 with 260 hp is equal or more weight than the 360 and 382 hp Germans, how sporting is the G8?

GM needs to get cars on a diet. Especially the Vue and Lambdas.

Edited March 31, 2008 by smk4565

[regfootball]

yet a Jetta GLI is over 3200 pounds. 3250. a couple of four popper UJS's are within a sack of potatoes of that.

again, those germans love their pork. r32, tipping close to 3500. not exactly light for a car that isn't all that big.

m5 tips two tons. yet that's ok. a6, 2 tons, that's ok.

basically, you're little schpiel is worthless.

toaureg, sized like a murano, but weighs like 5800 pounds.

q7, either 5300 or 5500 although its no more useful than a cx-9 or taurus x, 700-1000 pounds more

Edited March 31, 2008 by regfootball

[smk4565]

A Tahoe or Yukon isn't any more useful than an Acadia (aside from towing), although a better comparison is the Mercedes GL320. The Mercedes is heavy at 5300 pounds, but a Tahoe/Escalade is heavier, and both vehicles are the same length and have the same number of seats and the Benz tows over 7000 lbs and gets better mileage than the Tahoe Hybrid.

3200 pounds for a Jetta isn't bad, a Cobalt is the same and the Cobalt is all plastic.

The M5 is just over 4000 lbs, a CTS-V is 4300 lbs with an automatic. The next M5 has the front part of the chassis made of aluminum (50/50 balance and cut weight) and they will use carbon fiber as well, so it should be under 4000 pounds.

[Robert Hall]

yet a Jetta GLI is over 3200 pounds. 3250. a couple of four popper UJS's are within a sack of potatoes of that.

again, those germans love their pork. r32, tipping close to 3500. not exactly light for a car that isn't all that big.

m5 tips two tons. yet that's ok. a6, 2 tons, that's ok.

basically, you're little schpiel is worthless.

toaureg, sized like a murano, but weighs like 5800 pounds.

q7, either 5300 or 5500 although its no more useful than a cx-9 or taurus x, 700-1000 pounds more

Too much sausage in the Germans' diets, I guess... their cars and SUVs are as fat as American ones.. of course, with the volume sales of their trucks and SUVs, obesity is a bigger problem for the Americans for meeting the future CAFE regs..

Edited March 31, 2008 by moltar

[Robert Hall]

The M5 is just over 4000 lbs, a CTS-V is 4300 lbs with an automatic. The next M5 has the front part of the chassis made of aluminum (50/50 balance and cut weight) and they will use carbon fiber as well, so it should be under 4000 pounds.

The current 5 series has the front of the chassis made of aluminum (the whole front clip is aluminum, I believe)..they've been doing that for several years now.

[prinzSD]

*GASP!!*

And we all know that "cheap people" are losers with no ambition, mullets and a high school education at best?

I cannot believe the amount of arrogance in some of these posts. This isn't directed as a personal insult but I'd rather be a "cheap" "ignorant" individual than a poser yuppie anyday.

ONE OF THE REASONS I COME HERE LESS OFTEN AND POST EVEN LESS LATELY. All these posers and yuppies, and yes I might as well be stereotypical as these individuals think their way of reasoning is the right way. If you do not buy an import and instead buy a car made by Detroit you are looked upon as a fool. The last time I checked this was the USA, if they want to drive imports , fine, let me drive my domestics and leave me the f@#k alone. That goes for neighbors, friends family and evryone else. I can find plenty of alternatives to the imports to satisfy me. This is A GM fan site, so yes are views may be jaded but I do not go to an import web site and post my bull$h! over there. If you are anti-GM and have never anything positive to add then shut up and go somewhere else.

[turbo200]

I understand this is how it may come across when people compare the various pros and cons associated with each car, and then posters likeme proceed to rip apart the design, which is the basic concept of the car, so it's a little like saying 'this thing is all wrong from the beginning.' That is kind of what I'm saying about many of thier cars, Lacrosse, Impala, STS are all cars I can think of off the top of my head I would be able to come up with strong points on how spending the money to amke them doesn't make sense. additionally, I can say those cars make very appealing used car buys, because of the impression of luxury they can give but don't successfully convey.....so I can think of friends who would say that would make a great first car, you know with the right wheels it would look cool, but you give that consumer a few more years to mature, put him in an upscale environment, and that same consumer will come back, buy a new car, and demand no less than the best in terms of design in terms of quality and in terms even of performance.

No one is saying people who buy GM are foolish. There are still plenty of reasons people buy GM, some valid, solid powertrains, familiarity and good experience, protectionism, but chief among the reasons is always a good price. Check this very site, a GM fan site, and read the posts of those who recently bought GM cars, excepting hot vehicles like Malibu, Enclave, and CTS [worth the money], you'll find everyone boasting about what kind of a deal they got on thier car.

If GM cannot get its own loyalist fans to pay the full price for thier cars, or something more average and according to the industry, then there is something very wrong.

That's all we're trying to say. Not knocking any Lacrosse owners, or Lacrosse fans, when you look at it as basic transportation, it's a decent piece, and it'll get you from point A to B with a feeling of solidarity around you. But there are so many things wrong with it, I don't know where to begin. and putting it in the perspective of the marketplace, and comparing it say another reasonably close priced car, the MB C-class, and there is literally several oceans of difference in thier appeal. And you can understand why no buyers would actually pay C-class prices for the current Lacrosse. We want GM to appeal to buyers across the spectrum, including the inference of young successful urbanites all the way to families and individuals living in more rural areas. Ignoring one segment of that population is tantamount to defeat.

Edited March 31, 2008 by turbo200

[turbo200]

A Tahoe or Yukon isn't any more useful than an Acadia (aside from towing), although a better comparison is the Mercedes GL320. The Mercedes is heavy at 5300 pounds, but a Tahoe/Escalade is heavier, and both vehicles are the same length and have the same number of seats and the Benz tows over 7000 lbs and gets better mileage than the Tahoe Hybrid.

3200 pounds for a Jetta isn't bad, a Cobalt is the same and the Cobalt is all plastic.

The M5 is just over 4000 lbs, a CTS-V is 4300 lbs with an automatic. The next M5 has the front part of the chassis made of aluminum (50/50 balance and cut weight) and they will use carbon fiber as well, so it should be under 4000 pounds.

once again displaying a loose version of facts.

let's first off talk about the mainstream models, since that's what the mainstream buys

Mercedes Benz GL550 4matic v. Cadillac Escalade AWD v. Tahoe 4wd

MSRP $77,000 $58,000 $34,000

total tow capacity (lbs) 7500 7700 7500

fuel economy 13/17 12/18 14/20

hp/torque 381/390 403/417 320/340

seating capacity 7 8 8

I seem to remember the Cobalt being around the weight you quoted, and I know the other two are correct [though I don't know that we have an exact weight for the CTSv]. Compare the Cobalt to the Civic and I think the difference is greater, I think it's something like 2900 lbs.

Every other post doesn't have to be about the defficiencies in GM cars' weight. though you have a very valid point, mostly people here get it.