They're Back! GMPD to work again on SS models

[Z-06]

Hyper, there just isn't anything positive to say about such cars from my perspective. I can't be a cheerleader like you are and be honest about it.

Frankly, I really don't care how "important" the Cruze is for GM - I expect more, and it isn't there at the moment.

Gotta agree there. Considering it has been a year from the bankruptcy, Chrysler is in full force for the RWD and has something in store. GM is still being ho-hum. However I think we should wait till the Auto Shows circuit hits for the year, before we really write GM off.

Performance division being back is certainly a great news.

[z28luvr01]

Take out of it whatever you want to, but consider this quote from you-know-who:

Oh boyz, I go away on vacation and all I see are tears when I return ... You're not seeing the forest for the trees! The pics I last showed you, was that a LWB or SWB vehicle? Hmmmm? I said this before and I'm sure Camino will remember this, what if GM set up a unit inside the USA such as HSV is in Oz? What if that unit were to only make special cars for Chevy or even better, tribute cars for Pontiac enthusiast too ...

All is not lost, your PCS is with you, and I return to Oz in two weeks ...

Sounds like a job for GMPD

[Robert Hall]

Gotta agree there. Considering it has been a year from the bankruptcy, Chrysler is in full force for the RWD and has something in store. GM is still being ho-hum. However I think we should wait till the Auto Shows circuit hits for the year, before we really write GM off.

Performance division being back is certainly a great news.

Of course, with Chrysler, they've had an excellent RWD platform for 5 years now with the LX. GM has poorly utilized the RWD platforms they have left (Sigma and Zeta). They should have had planned and had several Zetas launched here when the platform was first launched in OZ instead of continuing the outdated W-generics.

Edited August 24, 2010 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Z-06]

Of course, with Chrysler, they've had an excellent RWD platform for 5 years now with the LX. GM has poorly utilized the RWD platforms they have left (Sigma and Zeta). They should have had planned and had several Zetas launched here when the platform was first launched in OZ instead of continuing the outdated W-generics.

GM lost so much revenue by fiddling with the decision whether to bring zeta here or not that it might have saved a couple of months of revenue going into bankruptcy had it made the decision and stuck with it.

I think when it came to RWD, both GM and Chrysler were on the same page, GM may be ahead, a year ago when either went into bankruptcy.

[hyperv6]

Gotta agree there. Considering it has been a year from the bankruptcy, Chrysler is in full force for the RWD and has something in store. GM is still being ho-hum. However I think we should wait till the Auto Shows circuit hits for the year, before we really write GM off.

Performance division being back is certainly a great news.

Who is not going to show a profit in 2010? Part of Chryslers big problem is they have no smaller good FWD cars that that make up most of the market. Fiat will address this but it will take time and a lot of risk. RWD cars are great but they will not save Chrysler.

The fact GM is trying to get to a point they will make money on the small cars that they failed to do so in the past is a good sign. A great selling FWD car is a the past to making it so GM can make the RWD cars and fun cars. Compaies with money can make some really great stuff.

I want GM to have the best small cars around and this would free up money and room for lower volume cars they could not risk otherwise.

[Camino LS6]

Of course, with Chrysler, they've had an excellent RWD platform for 5 years now with the LX. GM has poorly utilized the RWD platforms they have left (Sigma and Zeta). They should have had planned and had several Zetas launched here when the platform was first launched in OZ instead of continuing the outdated W-generics.

They should have had the GTO era Holden cars here when they were new, Before the F-bodies went out of production in 2002! GM has been teasing and futzing around with RWD forever at this point. Is it any wonder that my patience has run out? It is, and has been, a blatant hole in their lineup for a very long time.

[Robert Hall]

They should have had the GTO era Holden cars here when they were new, Before the F-bodies went out of production in 2002! GM has been teasing and futzing around with RWD forever at this point. Is it any wonder that my patience has run out? It is, and has been, a blatant hole in their lineup for a very long time.

Back in '02, they were running down the golden path of profit w/ trucks and SUVs, ignoring cars. Lots of woulda, coulda, shoulda...

[hyperv6]

1985?

No, not a chance.

Hyper, there just isn't anything positive to say about such cars from my perspective. I can't be a cheerleader like you are and be honest about it.

Frankly, I really don't care how "important" the Cruze is for GM - I expect more, and it isn't there at the moment.

Like it or not cars like the Cruze will pay for the cars you want. A RWD coupe with a 6.0 V8 is not going to turn GM around. THe sad fact is the market wants cars like the Cruze and Aveo and GM has failed to make one like this that made a profit. We can all see where that has led.

You should be looking to make these cars the best they can be as they will lead you to the promised land. GM makes profit here they will be free to make the limited volume cars you crave.

If GM had been making a profit on a Cobalt and other small cars they may have been able to spend more money on Pontiac to do it right.

The fact is it will take all types of cars to make it in this world. You are not going to just get what you want and nothing more. Few comapnies can get away with that anymore and the ones that do charge throught the butt for the cars they do sell in limited volumes.

I have no intentions to buy a Cruze or Aveo. But I want them to be the best damn FWD cars on the market and I want them to make a profit. They both will be built in the USA and the money made on them will fund many other projects. If these cars fail then GM fails and no RWD cars will let alone any FWD's.

In the not to far future GM is going to have to fund things with other than money on large Pick Ups if some get their ways.

FYI I would have picked 1965 for you not 1985. LOL!

Like it or not while cars like the Regal and other FWD's are not your first choice they are still good cars and there is still things about them that need to be enjoyed and appreciated. GMPD has made me learn that even a FWD car can be made fun. Let put it this way. I have a SS and the wife drives a GTP Comp G. I would not trade her for the GTP for anything. The GMPD work is that much better. If you have not driven a FWD GMPD SS then you can't understand.

IS RWD better yes but the GMPD SS still has a wow factor and makes you wonder if it really is a GM car.

[hyperv6]

They should have had the GTO era Holden cars here when they were new, Before the F-bodies went out of production in 2002! GM has been teasing and futzing around with RWD forever at this point. Is it any wonder that my patience has run out? It is, and has been, a blatant hole in their lineup for a very long time.

They had no money. None!

Lutz was abble to make something out of nothing with the GTO. It still took him till the second year to get the funds to do the hood and exhaust.

As Settlemire the next time you see him on how much the GTO cost to get here. It was amazing how little they had to spend. People wanted a new body on the car and in 04 they could not give them a hood.

I really thing few really understand how broke GM was.

[Camino LS6]

Back in '02, they were running down the golden path of profit w/ trucks and SUVs, ignoring cars. Lots of woulda, coulda, shoulda...

They certainly have a history of that sort of thinking - pushing one thing at the expense of others and then getting caught with their pants down. Pre-bankruptcy GM was huge, and had noe excuse for not having a well-rounded selection of vehicles available. Even now, they have no excuse for such a limited range as they have. They have never proprtioned their efforts in a broad, scaleable way that would have given them the flexibility to respond to market trends with chamges in product emphasis rather than wholesale changes of focus.

I fear that they are making the same old mistake again by focusing so tightly on small cars.

[Z-06]

Who is not going to show a profit in 2010? Part of Chryslers big problem is they have no smaller good FWD cars that that make up most of the market. Fiat will address this but it will take time and a lot of risk. RWD cars are great but they will not save Chrysler.

The fact GM is trying to get to a point they will make money on the small cars that they failed to do so in the past is a good sign. A great selling FWD car is a the past to making it so GM can make the RWD cars and fun cars. Compaies with money can make some really great stuff.

I want GM to have the best small cars around and this would free up money and room for lower volume cars they could not risk otherwise.

Profits are not because of products being RWD or FWD, they are because of lean manufacturing and eradication of burden costs. GM was better doing the job of paring the excess lard than Chrysler was. RWD may not save Chrysler, but at the same time not having RWD will certainly hamper GM.

[Robert Hall]

They had no money. None!

They had money, they spent it all on trucks and SUVs which were the profit centers then and ignored cars.

[Z-06]

I fear that they are making the same old mistake again by focusing so tightly on small cars.

and China, India.

Managers seem to be highly obsessed with those. The shortsighted strategy has moved from products to markets.

[Camino LS6]

They had no money. None!

Lutz was abble to make something out of nothing with the GTO. It still took him till the second year to get the funds to do the hood and exhaust.

As Settlemire the next time you see him on how much the GTO cost to get here. It was amazing how little they had to spend. People wanted a new body on the car and in 04 they could not give them a hood.

I really thing few really understand how broke GM was.

They had money troubles because they made very bad, wholesale changes in product that didn't work. They sacrificed their own future in an ill-conceived, and futile attempt to be what they were not. And, they failed to utilize the expertise they had at their disposal to correct things.

[Robert Hall]

and China, India.

Managers seem to be highly obsessed with those. The shortsighted strategy has moved from products to markets.

The are preparing for The Future.

China and India are growth markets, the US isn't. With the increase in the CAFE standards coming, the inevitable rise in gas prices down the road, and the greening of consumers, small cars are going to only increase in demand. Today's Malibu shopper is tommorow's Cruze shopper, today's Cobalt shopper is tommorow's Spark or Aveo consumer..

[Z-06]

The are preparing for The Future.

China and India are growth markets, the US isn't. With the increase in the CAFE standards coming, the inevitable rise in gas prices down the road, and the greening of consumers, small cars are going to only increase in demand. Today's Malibu shopper is tommorow's Cruze shopper, today's Cobalt shopper is tommorow's Spark or Aveo consumer..

I agree for the US market being saturated but I would not go to the length of saying US is having diminishing standards. US will still be a major market.

China and India are too top heavy to really look for real growth. All the hoopla about how strong their middle classes are will only come down like the housing market bubble here.

[Camino LS6]

That sort of future is just plain unacceptable.

[dwightlooi]

Sorry to go OT, but outside of a few jurisdictions, why is NOS illegal for road use? Its just another form of forced induction. A few people out there are burning biodiesel, Propane, water/methanol injection... even woodgas. Why not laughing gas? Granted, what it does may result in legal violations (Speeding, Exhibit of Speed, Burnouts), but not the Nitrous Oxide. Granted, its not really CARB certified... but a lot of stuff don't fall under that.

I agree that the automakers would never install it... its too risky from a PR standpoint and from a warranty standpoint.

I also agree that he was talking about the Equinox. ;-)

To start with, a lot of things government impose upon the people does not make sense. But they often impose it anyway out of ignorance, out of arrogance or to be in line with some political agenda.

In this particular case, it sort of makes sense. Nitrous Oxide (N2O) is an oxide of Nitrogen and is considered an air pollutant. Of course, in a nitrous oxide system installed in a car, the N20 breaks down under heat inside the cylinder into Nitrogen and Oxygen (2 x N2O --> 2 x N2 + 1 x O2). The oxygen is then used to burn additional fuel injected either in the intake manifold (a wet system) or by lengthening the fuel injector cycle (a dry system). Ideally, complete combustion of the additional fuel occurs and the engine is no dirtier than before. N2O is used instead of oxygen or high test hydrogen peroxide because it is safer (way safer) and is incapable of causing explosions.

However, if the uncombusted Nitrous Oxide gas is let out into the atmosphere for whatever reason it is a pollutant. If in the process of using Nitrous injection, the vehicle runs lean (too much nitrous, too little fuel) you end up with vastly increased NOx emissions. If it runs rich (often done intentionally for a margin of detonation safety) the car spews additional unburnt hydrocarbons and pollutes more than it normally would. Like removing catalytic converters it is deemed as a modification that is detrimental to the emissions of the vehicle. Nitrous is generally illegal (officially) for use on public roads. But since the system can be turned on or off -- unlike a missing cat converter -- it is practically impossible to prove usage on public roads. The owner can always claim that he never turn it on except on the drag strip and the cop cannot usually prove otherwise. Hence, there is practically no enforcement.

[hyperv6]

To start with, a lot of things government impose upon the people does not make sense. But they often impose it anyway out of ignorance, out of arrogance or to be in line with some political agenda.

In this particular case, it sort of makes sense. Nitrous Oxide (N2O) is an oxide of Nitrogen and is considered an air pollutant. Of course, in a nitrous oxide system installed in a car, the N20 breaks down under heat inside the cylinder into Nitrogen and Oxygen (2 x N2O --> 2 x N2 + 1 x O2). The oxygen is then used to burn additional fuel injected either in the intake manifold (a wet system) or by lengthening the fuel injector cycle (a dry system). Ideally, complete combustion of the additional fuel occurs and the engine is no dirtier than before. N2O is used instead of oxygen or high test hydrogen peroxide because it is safer (way safer) and is incapable of causing explosions.

However, if the uncombusted Nitrous Oxide gas is let out into the atmosphere for whatever reason it is a pollutant. If in the process of using Nitrous injection, the vehicle runs lean (too much nitrous, too little fuel) you end up with vastly increased NOx emissions. If it runs rich (often done intentionally for a margin of detonation safety) the car spews additional unburnt hydrocarbons and pollutes more than it normally would. Like removing catalytic converters it is deemed as a modification that is detrimental to the emissions of the vehicle. Nitrous is generally illegal (officially) for use on public roads. But since the system can be turned on or off -- unlike a missing cat converter -- it is practically impossible to prove usage on public roads. The owner can always claim that he never turn it on except on the drag strip and the cop cannot usually prove otherwise. Hence, there is practically no enforcement.

That is why GM had considered it for a short while for the Monte SS. It avoided all the goverment reqs imposed by the EPA on the auto industry.

What really killed was not so much warranty issues as it was GM legal on the issues of a high pressure bottle and the liabilites with the car in a crash or fire that would be acclerated with the gas. Imagine what the lawyers would have done with this one.

But again it is legal in most areas to use where you like. Only some areas have passed laws and most were due to the fact street racers were using it not emissions. There had been alot of import cars that had fatal crashes and often Nitrous was a target of these law makers to remove power from these cars. It is cheap and easy for most to install.

When these laws are passed it is not illegal to have a system in the car. In many cases it is illegal to have the full bottle hooked up in the car and if stopped they can ticket or tow the car depending on the local laws.

This has been a on going battle for a while. Ohio tried to pass a law but like many it was kicked out. As of today here and many other areas you can use Nitrous as you please. Most companies will state check your local laws before installing.

[hyperv6]

The RWD will help GM and will not hamper them. The public as a whole are brainwashed or ingrained in the FWD mode so the lack of a RWD is more a good thing than a must have thing. One Jump of the gas prices that could happen at any time the RWD car sales drop as it did at Chrysler evertime they spiked.

Good MPG small FWD cars will sell no matter what. But every time gas spikes Trucks and large cars sales slide. It is best to rely on the small car and enjoy the extra that a lager RWD car brings but not depend on it.

With the middle east as it is I would not bet the farm on large cars.

I in no way say they should not have larger RWD cars but I am firm in the fact they are not the first line of reliance in this market anymore.

I note just on this page 4 different reasons for trouble listed. They are only 4 of many. Too many here try to put all of GM's past and present issues and challanges into a 8 line post. It it were only that simple.

The bottom line is the days of the full size RWD car as the company leader at Chevy are over. There is a market for one but it will not be the top selling car of the line.

GM sold their soul to the truck line and look where that got them when gas went up and they needed money.

I hate Honda with a passion and I feel they are too consevitive on product. But there are many times they look like the Tortois and GM is the Hair.

GM needs better balance and the core needs to be with the smaller cars the market wants. Then you compliment it with the Trucks and larger RWD cars. The smaller cheaper cars no matter what but the larger more expensive cars only sell when times are good. A good product line up will take full advantage of all conditions it must face as this is a long race and as I recall the Rabbit lost.

[daves87rs]

It would stretch the imagination if a 3-door Aveo Sport model were produced, but a stinkin' 5 DOOR? That prospect has very little credibility. And a Cruze sport sedan? HO.HUM.

IF I AM GOING TO BE FORCED INTO CRAPBOXES THEY AT LEAST NEED TO PROJECT THE FAINTEST HINT OF SPORTINESS IN THE BODYSTYLE.

Or just buy a v6 Camaro..problem solved....

[daves87rs]

The are preparing for The Future.

China and India are growth markets, the US isn't. With the increase in the CAFE standards coming, the inevitable rise in gas prices down the road, and the greening of consumers, small cars are going to only increase in demand. Today's Malibu shopper is tommorow's Cruze shopper, today's Cobalt shopper is tommorow's Spark or Aveo consumer..

Creepy as that sounds, that just might happen...

Much is going to depend our "newest" buyers in the next 5 years....

Or the ression lasts another 10 years...

[daves87rs]

And my last thought for the night....who is going to buy these "halo" cars?

While GM really knows how to build them, will there be takers?

They could barely move the Cobalt SS when they had it...

[SAmadei]

I love Dwight's over the top tech descriptions.

However, if the uncombusted Nitrous Oxide gas is let out into the atmosphere for whatever reason it is a pollutant. If in the process of using Nitrous injection, the vehicle runs lean (too much nitrous, too little fuel) you end up with vastly increased NOx emissions. If it runs rich (often done intentionally for a margin of detonation safety) the car spews additional unburnt hydrocarbons and pollutes more than it normally would. Like removing catalytic converters it is deemed as a modification that is detrimental to the emissions of the vehicle.

I would imagine with modern OEM computers, an OEM Nitrious Oxide could be controlled to the point where the system is not running too rich or lean... and the catalytic would take care of the pollutants that didn't burn.

As far as it being illegal as an emissions issue, with the EPA/DEP making areas outlaw idling for more than three minutes, the automakers will be flaunting the law in the same way unless the car shuts itself off after 3 minutes of idle.

Nitrous is generally illegal (officially) for use on public roads. But since the system can be turned on or off -- unlike a missing cat converter -- it is practically impossible to prove usage on public roads. The owner can always claim that he never turn it on except on the drag strip and the cop cannot usually prove otherwise. Hence, there is practically no enforcement.

Not really true... a lot of NOS kits really should keep the bottle physically closed with a shutoff in the trunk. They have remote shutoffs, but they can fail. In any case, you have four stages to "prove" a violation: full bottle in trunk... bottle in trunk with a non-remote valve open... Armed... actually used. Following SEMA and enthusiast publications, it seems the only level where NOS is outlawed is local stuff. I've never heard any state outlaw NOS.

Most of what I've seen is on par with Hyper's last post.

[SAmadei]

Creepy as that sounds, that just might happen...

Much is going to depend our "newest" buyers in the next 5 years....

Or the ression lasts another 10 years...

At some point in vehicle shrinkage, the American public will turn on the EPA and CAFE. You can't just shove everyone into Sparks. We'll turn into a Cuba... driving 50 year old patched together cars, so that people can fit and fit their stuff.

Personally, I feel the crackdown on cars and driving will limit out mobility and eventually finish off any hope of growing the economy.

[daves87rs]

At some point in vehicle shrinkage, the American public will turn on the EPA and CAFE. You can't just shove everyone into Sparks. We'll turn into a Cuba... driving 50 year old patched together cars, so that people can fit and fit their stuff.

Personally, I feel the crackdown on cars and driving will limit out mobility and eventually finish off any hope of growing the economy.

I do agree with that....while buses and trains are nice, personal freedom is also nice too...

[hyperv6]

At some point in vehicle shrinkage, the American public will turn on the EPA and CAFE. You can't just shove everyone into Sparks. We'll turn into a Cuba... driving 50 year old patched together cars, so that people can fit and fit their stuff.

Personally, I feel the crackdown on cars and driving will limit out mobility and eventually finish off any hope of growing the economy.

Then they have laws like in Japan that as the car gets older the higher the tax is. This way they force the older cars off the road with out making it illegal to own them.

There is a growing group who wants to kill the car. They are not strong yet but many of the people they support are getting elected anymore. There may be a day they may take that freedom away. It will first start with a large national debt then they will greater tax the car you buy or own but higher taxes on fuel and even the roads you drive.

Anyone read about the technology they are look to that will tax the mile driven. They can take your car and never directly make a law about your car but by taxing the support system for your car. Most people are so uninformed anymore they will never see it coming. Daily we loose more and more freedoms with laws like these. Once they are gone you will never get them back.

As for the Nitrous you are correct. I deal with this every day as my firm sells more NOS products than about any company around. I work with several of the companies and SEMA on this so I see what they are trying to do. They are doing the same on in some areas by making laws that prevent aftermaket cat back exhaust. It often is an effort to prevent street racing where in places like California hundreds can gather.

I was in California near Kerny Mesa when they bust one of the largest groups ever. It was a big event out there and many cars were taken away.

[hyperv6]

And my last thought for the night....who is going to buy these "halo" cars?

While GM really knows how to build them, will there be takers?

They could barely move the Cobalt SS when they had it...

I would expect that GM will never sell 50,000 if either SS model. But to be fair the Cobalt and HHR SS were both very old cars when they got the package and they were never marketed.

I still get people who think I built my own SS and other I know get the same. One was just at Woodward and he was challanged for putting on the SS badge. Then he freaked the Chevy fan out when he proved it was a GM built car and showed him the near 300 HP turbo 2.0. I just ook someone for a ride my self and they were shocked at how it drove and handled.

I think this time we will see a better response if they market them like I think they will. Lets face it they are finally marketing the Vette again after how long?

The big key too is price keep them affordable.