CT8 to be First True Flagship in Modern Era

[steve333]

The CT6 doesn't have any design appeal. The front end is ugly, the rest of the car is boring and that tumor logo looks ridiculous on anything but a black mesh grill like the Elmiraj.

I don't see how the CT6 will sell while the ATS and CTS are not selling.

GM should have fixed those cars first, IMO. Better grills and front ends, re-designed CUE with buttons and knobs and a nicer dash.

[regfootball]

Cadillac has some issues with why the current models are not selling, apart from the fact they aren't German.

Styling, not stunning even if ok

Can't do art and science without doing it full bore so the softened art and science look doesn't register

Odd grille front ends

Interiors improved but still don't match Audi (and have a lot of borderline tacky bright work ) seat leathers still look lesser GM and instrumentation is not wow. Cue has been railed in the press

Ambitious MSRP push has backfired can't move up prices like that

No good lease deals ever

And perhaps most importantly. Cadillac has always been about large and comfortable, especially to the traditional Cadillac demographic. Now you have people who won't buy Cadillac sedans because they are not large enough inside , particularly the backseat. ATS CTS they want to be volume sellers but middle age white men who caddy has relied on for sales won't even look at an ATS because they can't fit in the back or it's still a bit small in front. CT6 finally brings back the hope that a Caddy will have ostentatious size and it will outprice the market there. That may bode well for the chances of a Buick Avenir sales wise.

CT6 out of the gate has a price issue. And the same oddness in the front end. I can tell Caddy is trying to create some edgy look with small headlights and an understated grille but they just haven't nailed the formula here yet to get a new signature look. CT 6 does look low and lean and long that is going to be ok. CT 8 will need to look taller and bulkier.

I think they will expect and need 15-20k yearly sales in the US from the CT 6 and I think in the end they will adjust price to get it. Also to move to push the sales of the brand in other markets as much as possible. CTS AND ATS should both be moving 40k in the US.

If Caddy cared, they would change the sedan ATS to the ATS L body with extra length and then give it a new dash. Put it the new powertrains. Then, create insane lease deals to move the car.

CTS, fix the front end and interior bits that need it. Move the 3.0tt into that car. Adjust pricing and lease deals. Get these cars out there.

In the end after you do that and try to plug in some niche models, the big elephant in the room is the lack of Cadillac crossovers. My boss now and my last boss both drive Cadillacs! Which one? SRX. in one case traded his CTS coupe for it. I am guessing the women in their lives had something to do with it. Audi and now Mercedes and even Porsche kill with crossover sales. Caddy can do all it wants with sedans which you think the mid age to old white guy core market has been for caddy. But the market today is dictated by women and their preferences and so you get people shelling huge bucks for Q5's etc. and now the guys are getting older and finding out there is something to sitting up higher and not having to bend and contort , you just slide in. We can talk all we want about Caddy sedans but they have to address the big crossover problem more than anything. They need to get a buyer base that is something other than older white men.

Don't discount this either. The recession wiped out the ability for a lot of Cadillac intenders to get that next Cadillac ever. And the economy the last 6 1/2 years has been so crappy to the people who would have been their customer base. These people have given up on the idea of ever getting a caddy again because of no financial hope to. BMW and the likes get generations in with cheap leases and now watered down models like the CLA. Tesla has maybe taken some luxury intenders away too. Simply put, Cadillac is forced to find basically all new demographic base of buyers and they simply have done nothing of the sort. The move to New York may help some with this. But it's not going to solve the fact that they have no idea how to go out and capture the hearts of all the people that actually can throw away money on a car these days. Nobody exists today like they did 40-50-20 years ago who can and wants to throw it at a Cadillac. In particular too. Very very few women register with Cadillac.

Edited June 20, 2015 by regfootball

[Cmicasa the Great]

Say what U want.. I see Sex on Wheels... Look at that Ass  

 

 

 

[Frisky Dingo]

Meh, I hope they make it a production Elmiraj, and I hope it kicks ass. Unfortunately, their other recent offerings seem to indicate they are still willing to cut corners where necessary to deliver a product at a price point. The Elmiraj CANNOT be accused of this. It'll doom the car. And 95K to start for an NA 3.6?? Laughable.

[hyperv6]

SMK you really need to go back and learn. GM made enough money to survive in the 90's  on trucks but had little to plow into ventures like Hybrids that 15 years ago were a risky move. By the time they proved themselves GM did not have the money to pay attention. When they drop cars like the Camaro because they had little money to invest in a new platform because of crash standards it was very telling of their condition. GM had been hemorrhaging money since the 70'S and like market share at some point it runs out no matter how large you are.

Toyota had the money to risk and it paid off. Today the models are here and growing so it is not longer an issue. The new Malibu and CT6 will be leading edge and show it does not have to look like a Science experiment.

 

Cmicasa

A&E was a Freudian slip.  I caught the others.

As for the CTS, ATS and CT6 as building blocks I once agreed but today that has changed. Today they are a foundation that was placed but the house to be built upon them is no longer the same house. We now have more money to build a better house so the present models are no longer going to evolve as they once were projected. The ATS and CTS will see major changes much sooner than most anticipate and will take a step up to where they are not just meeting the others but besting them in all areas. I expect the styling also to change some.

 

First until there is a Euro market there will be no wagons. Americans hate wagons and there is just no money there till Europe is on line. No matter how you feel reality is just too much in the way. The convertible well It would be nice and wonderful but yet again too little profit for the time and money expended for right now. The efforts into a better CUV and SUV models will pave the way here to not just a Convertible coupe but very likely a small roadster too.

 

A company like Cadillac first needs to master the basics on their comeback. They need to be the best in Sedan, SUV and CUV. They offer coupe now of which I have only seen one on the road and I was driving it. Once they become profitable in these other segments and convince people to buy them in the most popular segments the less popular segments are non starters. They need to get people to drive these cars and realize this is not another false GM start of the past. This will take time and marketing that just has started a few months ago. Just look at the photos in advertising as they now have the best photos of the CTS and ATS I have ever seen. They truly look enticing. Low 3/4 rear shots in the right lighting.

 

For now GM will have to lose some to the other MFG as they can not yet do it all as well as needed. Sure they could rush out some slow selling low volume models and end up like the Golden Corral of automobiles. Sure Golden Corral is one of the few places you can get about anything you want but all of it is half assed.

 

All you wish and dream of is coming but you have to let it happen in the time it will happen. You have to walk before you can run and that is just what Cadillac is doing. They are coming from an era few divisions could have survived with what was equal to two broken legs and a broken arm. Today they are making that comeback but like someone in rehab it takes work and time. If you try to rush it you risk damage that could set you back fatally.

 

The key to all this was GM getting the right people in place and the money to let them do their work. We got that 10 months ago. To me they have been moving pretty fast already even though much of what they are doing is not visible to outsiders.

 

The Convertible you desire could have been out next year but what if they are planning to do it now on the new CTS or ATS? Sure it may add 3 more years but why spend the money on the model you are moving away from and put it ino the one that is your building block. I get the vibes once they move to the CT4 and 5 we will see more variation.

Lets face it the CT6 is the car Mark Ruess had to fight those over him in trying to get better more expensive door handles. He lost. Today he was able to get them  to agree to the proper funding and the proper people to pull this off. The results will be much more dramatic in the end.

For the most part the Cadillac and the direction it was moving was blown up last year and now we are at a major reset where the in progress models will be finished and many that were not as far along will be reset. I believe the SRX replacement was delayed to make it better than it was originally projected. There was no other reason to delay it. There have been some internal battles being fought and I think the good guys won and while it will cost some time it will pay off in the end.

[hyperv6]

FYI the CT6 is good but not good enough. Remember the appeal of the Elmirage or the new Buick Avenir when they were shown. Even the competitors offered compliments. This is what they need to do in the CT8 and the rest of the line.

Like the feeling you get when viewing a Ferrari Lusso 250 GT that is what needs to be done. So much of todays styling is guided by aero and safety they need to take the time and look at the results and keep the styling to the point you not just see it but feel it inside. Few cars today have compelling styling that make them interesting just to sit and look at. The Avenir accomplished that now it is time for Cadillac to do it with no goofy gimmicks like retro or hard lines.

[balthazar]

The Cadillac that I feel sums up the future of Cadillac is the 1936 Worlds Fair Series 90 Aero-Dynamic Coupe Style 5859 Fleetwood look it up. 

 

1933.

[hyperv6]

Thanks. My poster from the Glenmoore Show did not show a date and tried do it from memory. 

[Cmicasa the Great]

 

The Cadillac that I feel sums up the future of Cadillac is the 1936 Worlds Fair Series 90 Aero-Dynamic Coupe Style 5859 Fleetwood look it up. 

 

 

 

 

come one bud.. I knu what U were referring, not to mention it inspired the Sixteen

 

 

 

[regfootball]

Wow the sixteen concept still looks amazing.

[hyperv6]

Well that is not the car the one I refer too is the two door sedan version of the same color. It has that 4 door coupe like roof line and less formal and much more dramatic and modern.  I just checked it was a 1936 Cadillac Aerodynamic coup e is what it was called. It was the production version and was much nicer.

 

The Sixteen is nice but was never meant for production. make the hood shorter and the wheels smaller to where it is realistic and you loose a lot of the things that make it compelling.

 

While you want to draw attention you need to do it in a way that it is still practical. No unrealistically long hoods, no wheels that would add a quarter ton to the weight or any other odd show car traits that just do not translate well to the real world. you have to keep it real.

 

The Sixteen would have been very heavy if produced as it was and not all that easy to drive in places it would be popular like LA.

[balthazar]

The Cadillac Fleetwood Aerodynamic Coupe debuted in the 1933 World's Fair. That car was a singular 'prototype' (actually, this is the 2nd; a prior one had differing details), it had brightwork trimmed windows and 4-bar bumpers. This is that car :

 

 

Though I've never seen anyone term it so, the radical, future-trend elements of it's design were far enough removed from the industry in general for '33 that one could easily make a case for it being the first GM concept car, pre-dating the Buick Y-Job of '38. I digress.

 

The Aerodynamic Coupe went into very limited production from '34-37.

 

1934 / Series 452D / style# 5799

1935 / Series 60 / style# 5799

1936 / Series 90 / style# 5799

1937 / Series 90 / style# 5799

 

Only 20 production, custom-ordered cars were built; five V-8s, seven V-12s and eight V-16s. The fate of the 'World's Fair' car is unknown. Most recent accounting has 6 known Aerodynamic Coupe survivors today. It truly was a milestone in the industry's history.

 

Edited June 20, 2015 by balthazar

[hyperv6]

Just going by what was on concept cars.com.

 

Anyways this is the car I had in mind what ever it was. 

It looks much better in a side or rear 3/4 photo in color. This is the worst angle of the car.

[balthazar]

Well, I would say its the 'least dynamic' view. Here you go :

 

- - - - 

Naturally, I've perused conceptcarz.com countless times. They are not infallible, of course. To wit: they identify the famous '51 LeSabre concept as a "Buick". 

In the Aerodynamic entry they state thus : 

"The 'Aero-Dynamic Coupe' was introduced as a prototype at the 1932 World's Fair, and joined the Cadillac lineup as a production model in 1933."

Of course, anyone with internet access can find they are off by 1 year on both years stated.

[hyperv6]

Yes even you and I can be wrong.

 

Nothing in color? the blue really sets off the car.

[Cmicasa the Great]

What this place needs is a real asswipe faux elitist. Anyone know a dude named sfbreh or mgescuro?

[balthazar]

Yes even you and I can be wrong.

Curious.

 

Anyone know a dude named sfbreh or mgescuro?

God, please, no.

msg needs serious psychological intervention.

 

- - - - -

[El Kabong]

I know a stalker. He'll follow you to the ends of the earth if you make fun of his brand of choice. I mentioned downvoting him in another place and three hours later I'd been downvoted five times.

It's amusing if you can use it to your advantage, is what I'm saying

As to the CT8: a Voltec driveline with a V12 for just under 100 grand would be a game-changer, wot?

[regfootball]

C/g doesn't need any mgscros

[Drew Dowdell]

I bet the success of the CT6 will impact the development budget for the CT8.  If the CT6 sales lag the first year or two, I wonder how much money they'll put into the CT8.

 

You've already lost that bet. The majority of the CT8 budget is likely already in place. We're in 2015 right now. The CT6 doesn't go on sale till the end of this year. ​Cadillac​ can't be setting a budget in 2018, after a couple years of CT6 sales, for a car that goes into production in 2019.

[Drew Dowdell]

 

300/mnth is an excellent sales goal for the CT6. 

Image cars often are built with a 'big picture' WRT profits.

Suppose they get 300 a month here, 300 a month in China.  That is only 7200 cars a year, I don't know if that makes profit when the chassis underpins only that one model for now.  The turbo V6 could be scaled across other Cadillacs, so development cost on that shouldn't be too big a deal, but do they re-coup the chassis cost, and interior design cost, wind tunnel cost, certifications, advertising costs, etc at 7,000 global units a year?

 

 

Such small picture thinking.  The CT6 is not going to be the only Omega car nor will the chassis remain a Cadillac exclusive forever.   Buick will almost certainly be getting a copy and that will also sell in China and the US.

[Drew Dowdell]

Porsche spend $727,000 to build a 959, but sold it for $239,000.  They took the loss because it was a halo builder, and got them lots of press and let them sell more 911s and 928s and 944s, etc.  And it established Porsche up there with Ferrari and Lamborghini at the time.  On a sports car I think you can afford to lose money on production because you'll get media coverage and press for your brand.  I don't see a sedan being featured on all the TV shows, or ending up on t-shirts or bedroom wall posters the way a supercar would.

 

To use an analogy, Disney paid over a billion dollars to buy Star Wars.  Even if they don't recoup that in profit from the movies (which they probably will) they still have cartoons, toys, action figures, t-shirts, video games, etc to sell.  GM can't use the Omega platform anywhere else except for big Cadillacs (or a big expensive Buick), so the CT6 and CT8 can't really afford to be long term money losers.  Otherwise the bean counters won't authorize replacements.

 

There's a whoooole buncha assuming right there.  The Omega is very light weight. It is very flexible.  It can scale down easier than Alpha can scale up.

 

So then why can't the next full redesign of the CTS be on the Omega? 

Why can't there be a coupe in the form of a CT5?

If you build a CT5 coupe, why can't there be a Buick Riviera?

It can go up in size too... so there can be a CT7 Grand Coupe.

It can be a crossover, so there's an XT7 to fit between XT5 and Escalade.

Buick could theoretically get an XT7 version to differentiate itself more from GMC.

[balthazar]

Can someone whip up a educational 'platform' thread?

 

I'm a frame guy, those are simple. Modifying them is simple.

I know what a platform is, what I want to know is why some can be stretched/shrunk to a significant degree, and others cannot.

 

With CAFE and engineering/testing costs, it just casually seems that a bit of over-engineering on platforms would allow a greater degree of versatility.

 

Include pics, please!  

[hyperv6]

Drew you are correct as the budget for the CT8 was done when the business case was approved. The CT6 sales will not have any impact on what they do and how much they spend on the CT8. The CT6 was relegated from where Cadillac's destination to another stepping stone. I suspect it was approved back in August when all the noise happened.

As for the Omega it has to be leveraged out and Buick will see a version and I even speculate Vauxhall and Holden may get a version.

The Omega is much more advanced than the Alpha and the improvements have been put in place. It is more flexible and lighter than GM has let on.

I would not be surprised if we do not see a SUV on this at some point and have stated so from the start. It is possible we may even see a Chevy too.

[Drew Dowdell]

Can someone whip up a educational 'platform' thread?

 

I'm a frame guy, those are simple. Modifying them is simple.

I know what a platform is, what I want to know is why some can be stretched/shrunk to a significant degree, and others cannot.

 

With CAFE and engineering/testing costs, it just casually seems that a bit of over-engineering on platforms would allow a greater degree of versatility.

 

Include pics, please!

 

It's mostly around the hard points of where the body mounts up to either other parts of the hardware (suspension, transmission, engine mounts), the firewall and windshield.  In most cases, you can make the sausages of different lengths by swapping out the front/middle/rear sections as you like. Usually the width of the car has to remain pretty much the same regardless of the length.

 

The problem with over engineering is that it often adds weight, but you are correct that intentionally engineering some flexibility in to the platform is a goal of all of the manufacturers today to reduce costs.  VW/Audi gets a lot of the credit for this currently, but the idea goes way back to the Chrysler K-Car platform.

[smk4565]

As mentioned before a V12 would be cool, but I doubt anyone would offer a V12 under $100,000, and I don't think Cadillac will ever make a V12 either.

 

Autoline After Hours a few weeks ago had Cadillac's lead engineer, whose name I forget, but he spend about 15 minutes explaining the CT6 chassis and they had the full size cutaway model and he explained the materials, welding, riviting, etc.  So that would be a good thing for anyone wanting to learn about the chassis to look up on You Tube.

[hyperv6]

As Stated it is about hard points. In the past it was about wheel base like the Camaro, GTO and SS on the Zeta where they were adaptable to a point. With the new models like the Alpha and Omega they are now more adaptable as not only length and wheel base are more varied but also the width is more adaptable now.

 

Now a little more engineering has to go in as they have to rework the geometry of the suspension in some cases like the Camaro and CTS but the general points and parts are similar to save cost.

The Omega has taken it to the next level with weight loss as they have taken thing farther with out going totally exotic on all the materials. In the case of both platforms they are looking at every single part as to where they can cut weight. Even things as simple as fasteners that are longer than  needed. They found in the Camaro 25 pounds of weight cut just on fastener lengths that were longer than needed. Now they may have to carry more different size fasteners but they need the weight savings more.

 

Once they do move to more aluminum they will drop even more weight.

 

It is not over engineered it is more precise engineered. In the past close enough worked today they have to have more exacting specifications in more areas to exploit strength and lighter weight. Today it is much more possible with computer design as in the past it would have been too expensive and time consuming to do.

 

So because of this you have a CT6 that weighs in at nearly the same weight of a CTS and we will see the CTS in the next gen drop even more weight.

The weight loss even on the FWD like on the Malibu with 300 pounds lost and the weight loss on the coming Cruise are major accomplishments. They could have just done Aluminum everything but at the risk of lost profits or higher cost. GM has done it the hard way and it will give them a greater advantage going forward.

 

GM tried this with the Zeta and while it was flexible it just never was to the point they wanted and the weight was still higher than they wanted. Case in point the Camaro was as heavy and large as it was because of the Hard points as they could not move them more than they had. With the new money post chapter 11 GM could take the time and do the job to the point they needed this time.

Weight loss is going to be the new race over Horse Power. Companies will work to cut weight and will reap the benefits of it and not just in MPG. The fact is less mass will improve not only MPG but performance, handling and stopping. Because of this they can enhance a car much with out even changing the engine with more HP.

 

I would expect an Alpha II in the near future for the next Gen CTS. It will be bases on the present car but receive much more enhancements to lighten the mass as they have on the Omega. I am not sure we will get the name change but the enhancements will be seen.

 

The next Cruze in some forms under 3000 pounds and the next base Malibu right near that. That is big in todays market.

 

It is all about not over engineering but the details. Little things add up. Lighter seats, fasteners. Panels etc. while yet still holding a 5 star crash rating.

 

Computer design has really changed the industry and it is far from where it is going. 3D printers are now doing things faster than ever for prototyping things to see how it looks or will work.

Edited June 21, 2015 by hyperv6

[Drew Dowdell]

They won't be going to more aluminum in the Omega unless it is some sort of sport car to be loud. They specifically left steal in certain areas because the weight of the steel alone was less than aluminum + required sound deadening material. Steel has some acoustical properties that aluminum doesn't have.  Going with both let them net out to a lower curb weight.

[El Kabong]

Good call on the sound deadening properties of steel. I hadn't considered that all that much, even after working with laminated steel in Oshawa.

[hyperv6]

I expect the mix to be the same as it is now but as the platform is evolved I expect other and more lighter materials to be added. I am looking at the Alpha 2.0 or Omega 2.0 or what ever they call it.

 

But I never expect them to fully go Aluminum for a good while yet to retain cost.

 

I do expect more use of molded composite in the future like the new molded carbon fiber that GM and others have invested in. Look for it in things like Mirrors and the like. I expect they will attack components like this to save weight over the next 5-10 years. Cost are coming down with short and faster production times. The material is cheap just the labor is intensive to make it.

Cadillac will see it first with their price point and lower volumes.

[Cmicasa the Great]

Hyper.. U are correct in your belief that GM is gonna be moving more toward the use of CFiber. Aluminum, magnesium, carbon fiber and woven mesh will be included in Chevy's let alone Cadillacs to drive down weight. It was employed extensively thru out the Chevy Bolt in an effort  to help maximize range.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

They won't be going to more aluminum in the Omega unless it is some sort of sport car to be loud. They specifically left steal in certain areas because the weight of the steel alone was less than aluminum + required sound deadening material. Steel has some acoustical properties that aluminum doesn't have.  Going with both let them net out to a lower curb weight.

I don’t think that’s the case at all. From what I recall about acoustic properties, sound and electrical wave properties are very similar.  I don’t recall the unit of measure, but it is a lot like impedance or resistance to pressure.  Thus, aluminum resists both more than steel, which is more excitable due to it’s density.  And combined with the fact that aluminum bodies are typically much thicker gauge, and any specific materials properties now have to consider volume.  In fact, I am no recalling an F-150 document that mentioned how optimization for strength and sound in critical areas, is easier with aluminum, because you are not paying a huge weight penalty by adding needed local thickness.

 

Anyway, chipping away at sub system weight with exotic materials and processes only nets you so much reduction.  Even when taken to the extreme, and unless shaving fractions of 1/10ths of seconds on a track is your goal, there is little other benefit.  Fuel economy gains are minimal.  So as we all cheer for the automakers to double the price of our family sedan to gain a leg up in bragging rights, maybe we should pause and gage the real benefit, which is seldom realized.  Hey, it keeps me employed, but I like to question everything. 

[G. David Felt]

 

They won't be going to more aluminum in the Omega unless it is some sort of sport car to be loud. They specifically left steal in certain areas because the weight of the steel alone was less than aluminum + required sound deadening material. Steel has some acoustical properties that aluminum doesn't have.  Going with both let them net out to a lower curb weight.

I don’t think that’s the case at all. From what I recall about acoustic properties, sound and electrical wave properties are very similar.  I don’t recall the unit of measure, but it is a lot like impedance or resistance to pressure.  Thus, aluminum resists both more than steel, which is more excitable due to it’s density.  And combined with the fact that aluminum bodies are typically much thicker gauge, and any specific materials properties now have to consider volume.  In fact, I am no recalling an F-150 document that mentioned how optimization for strength and sound in critical areas, is easier with aluminum, because you are not paying a huge weight penalty by adding needed local thickness.

 

Anyway, chipping away at sub system weight with exotic materials and processes only nets you so much reduction.  Even when taken to the extreme, and unless shaving fractions of 1/10ths of seconds on a track is your goal, there is little other benefit.  Fuel economy gains are minimal.  So as we all cheer for the automakers to double the price of our family sedan to gain a leg up in bragging rights, maybe we should pause and gage the real benefit, which is seldom realized.  Hey, it keeps me employed, but I like to question everything. 

 

So you bring up some interesting points and so in looking online, it would seem that aluminum when thicker than steel does quiet things down better, but strength is in steel and they now have ways to produce steel parts that are either painted with sound deadening paint or as GM has done with Buick that uses quiet steel to kill sound. Steel dissipates heat better than aluminum.

 

If you want to fully understand Quiet Steel read this: http://www.matsci.com/acoustic-materials/quiet-steel/

 

Here is another story on how Quiet steel reduces weight and noise. http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2011/12/08/017782-popular-noise-damping-quiet-steel-finds-new-role-reducing-vehicle.html

 

Even Canada does a great write up on what Quiet Steel is http://www.autos.ca/auto-tech/feature-what-on-earth-is-quiet-steel/

 

I think Quiet steel has a real future in auto's.

[El Kabong]

Quiet steel has already had a pretty long history in GM vehicles.

Interesting that he doesn't think shaving ounces out of subsystems and whatnot is worth the effort. The Alpha's body panels use serrated edges so as not to unnecessarily use steel in between spot welds.

This perhaps explains the excellence of Alpha products, as opposed to status quo.

[Drew Dowdell]

 

They won't be going to more aluminum in the Omega unless it is some sort of sport car to be loud. They specifically left steal in certain areas because the weight of the steel alone was less than aluminum + required sound deadening material. Steel has some acoustical properties that aluminum doesn't have.  Going with both let them net out to a lower curb weight.

I don’t think that’s the case at all. From what I recall about acoustic properties, sound and electrical wave properties are very similar.  I don’t recall the unit of measure, but it is a lot like impedance or resistance to pressure.  Thus, aluminum resists both more than steel, which is more excitable due to it’s density.  And combined with the fact that aluminum bodies are typically much thicker gauge, and any specific materials properties now have to consider volume.  In fact, I am no recalling an F-150 document that mentioned how optimization for strength and sound in critical areas, is easier with aluminum, because you are not paying a huge weight penalty by adding needed local thickness.

 

Anyway, chipping away at sub system weight with exotic materials and processes only nets you so much reduction.  Even when taken to the extreme, and unless shaving fractions of 1/10ths of seconds on a track is your goal, there is little other benefit.  Fuel economy gains are minimal.  So as we all cheer for the automakers to double the price of our family sedan to gain a leg up in bragging rights, maybe we should pause and gage the real benefit, which is seldom realized.  Hey, it keeps me employed, but I like to question everything. 

 

 

The benefit in the CT6 is a 740i sized sedan with a 335xi weight. As long as the sound reduction properties are what they say they are, I think the benefits are rather obvious.   The use of steel in place of aluminum in the CT6 was specifically around the floor pan, firewall, and passenger cage. 

[El Kabong]

It was probably a lack of attention to details like this that caused the F-Series to barely undercut the current Sulverado's weight, despite the aluminum body.

Excellence is not easy to achieve. But the results are well worth it.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

 

 

They won't be going to more aluminum in the Omega unless it is some sort of sport car to be loud. They specifically left steal in certain areas because the weight of the steel alone was less than aluminum + required sound deadening material. Steel has some acoustical properties that aluminum doesn't have.  Going with both let them net out to a lower curb weight.

I don’t think that’s the case at all. From what I recall about acoustic properties, sound and electrical wave properties are very similar.  I don’t recall the unit of measure, but it is a lot like impedance or resistance to pressure.  Thus, aluminum resists both more than steel, which is more excitable due to it’s density.  And combined with the fact that aluminum bodies are typically much thicker gauge, and any specific materials properties now have to consider volume.  In fact, I am no recalling an F-150 document that mentioned how optimization for strength and sound in critical areas, is easier with aluminum, because you are not paying a huge weight penalty by adding needed local thickness.

 

Anyway, chipping away at sub system weight with exotic materials and processes only nets you so much reduction.  Even when taken to the extreme, and unless shaving fractions of 1/10ths of seconds on a track is your goal, there is little other benefit.  Fuel economy gains are minimal.  So as we all cheer for the automakers to double the price of our family sedan to gain a leg up in bragging rights, maybe we should pause and gage the real benefit, which is seldom realized.  Hey, it keeps me employed, but I like to question everything. 

 

So you bring up some interesting points and so in looking online, it would seem that aluminum when thicker than steel does quiet things down better, but strength is in steel and they now have ways to produce steel parts that are either painted with sound deadening paint or as GM has done with Buick that uses quiet steel to kill sound. Steel dissipates heat better than aluminum.

 

If you want to fully understand Quiet Steel read this: http://www.matsci.com/acoustic-materials/quiet-steel/

 

Here is another story on how Quiet steel reduces weight and noise. http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2011/12/08/017782-popular-noise-damping-quiet-steel-finds-new-role-reducing-vehicle.html

 

Even Canada does a great write up on what Quiet Steel is http://www.autos.ca/auto-tech/feature-what-on-earth-is-quiet-steel/

 

I think Quiet steel has a real future in auto's.

 

Of course improved steel has a real future.

But Aluminum certainly does too and it will always offer more improvements yet, especially in sound deadening, which btw can also benefit with expensive coatings if they deem it necessary.

[hyperv6]

Well sound may have a small marketing part in this but cost is the prime mover not only in building but repair.

 

GM is using all assets to build cars this day and try to retain cost not only for profits but for the sake of saving customers. In todays market with lines like Chevy they still have to provide value and a $45K Malibu would do no one any good.

 

GM is smart engineering as they are reducing weight and doing it the hard way with engineering. It is easy to apply aluminum to a body. I am not sure what all the fuss over the Ford trucks was all about as many automakers have used it for years and most Semi MFG have used it for even longer. Weight in large rigs is lost income so everything from the largest semi to the local UPS or potato chip truck has used it.

 

Cost and repair has always been the issue in the auto segment.

 

As for steel there is so many different grades to use for strength to sound to what ever. Most cars anymore for sound use small pads on the doors to make them not have any resonance from the road or even when they shut they thud better.

Sound control today is done so many different ways. Dampening, Electronic etc.

The key to the future is the MFG that controls cost and losses the most mass is going to gain a very strong advantage in performance, MPG and the size of their cars. GM's investment so far and the more money they sent to R&D will pay off very much.

 

Ford to me took the easy way out in losing weight and the hard way with dealing with repairs and cost. If they had engineered the weight out on top of the Aluminum they may have really had a real advantage. The old trucks were pigs and the new ones just have a slight advantage on GM who has not even gone to Aluminum yet.

With the pending rules that just were announced it will become even a greater challenge and the Colorado may be a God send in the right direction as they move people to a smaller truck.

[El Kabong]

All you have to do is look at GM's market share gains to know that bringing in smaller trucks was a good move. They are effective without necessarily being flashy.

By the same token, the Omega platform doesn't have the "whee, lookit ME!" pizzaz that an all-aluminum chassis would. But you can't argue the results.

[hyperv6]

In the end it should be the total mass that matters and not the materials. Ford marketing has made everyone think they have invented the DI Turbo and the Aluminum body but they didn't. GM just needs to do a better job marketing their smart and careful engineering as it is very impressive but no one knows about it. Many still are shocked I have a Turbo DI 4 cylinder predating Ford in a 08 HHR. I even have more power than theirs yet today.

 

Ford really has done well with marketing and I can only hope GM catches up there. For once they have something good to market but yet they are still not doing as much marketing as they could or should do.

 

People today are so ignorant as they only know what the latest thing posted on their phone is true or not. Just look at the people who go out and interview people on the street on global news and politics. I just saw some guy ask people about Jon Bonjovi's run for president. They never even caught on to the joke when he said he was livin on a prayer.

 

These soft minds need to be mined and collected with info and excitement for the product anymore. If GM does not do it others will and do it with inferior product at that.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

In the end it should be the total mass that matters and not the materials. Ford marketing has made everyone think they have invented the DI Turbo and the Aluminum body but they didn't. GM just needs to do a better job marketing their smart and careful engineering as it is very impressive but no one knows about it. Many still are shocked I have a Turbo DI 4 cylinder predating Ford in a 08 HHR. I even have more power than theirs yet today.

 

Ford really has done well with marketing and I can only hope GM catches up there. For once they have something good to market but yet they are still not doing as much marketing as they could or should do.

 

People today are so ignorant as they only know what the latest thing posted on their phone is true or not. Just look at the people who go out and interview people on the street on global news and politics. I just saw some guy ask people about Jon Bonjovi's run for president. They never even caught on to the joke when he said he was livin on a prayer.

 

These soft minds need to be mined and collected with info and excitement for the product anymore. If GM does not do it others will and do it with inferior product at that.

 Downsizing and ever increasing use of Aluminum is pretty much a given at this point. Not sure it is a worthwhile effort to criticize one's marketing for pronouncing the fact they are pushing both.

Edited June 23, 2015 by Wings4Life

[El Kabong]

In the end it should be the total mass that matters and not the materials. Ford marketing has made everyone think they have invented the DI Turbo and the Aluminum body but they didn't. GM just needs to do a better job marketing their smart and careful engineering as it is very impressive but no one knows about it. Many still are shocked I have a Turbo DI 4 cylinder predating Ford in a 08 HHR. I even have more power than theirs yet today.

 

Ford really has done well with marketing and I can only hope GM catches up there. For once they have something good to market but yet they are still not doing as much marketing as they could or should do.

 

People today are so ignorant as they only know what the latest thing posted on their phone is true or not. Just look at the people who go out and interview people on the street on global news and politics. I just saw some guy ask people about Jon Bonjovi's run for president. They never even caught on to the joke when he said he was livin on a prayer.

 

These soft minds need to be mined and collected with info and excitement for the product anymore. If GM does not do it others will and do it with inferior product at that.

Before you go all lovey-dovey over Ford marketing, ask yourself:

-why is Ford losing market share, nearly across the board, month over month?

-why is it that GM and Mopar are gaining market share in the truck market, and Ford is not? (besides the fact that Ford's frame vendor can't actually build frames)?

Ford lives and dies by their marketing. And right now they're dying by it. And don't forget, their "luxury" brand has burned through ad campaigns like they have styling languages.

GM is playing the long game. And they are doing it well. All it would take for them to become lighter than the F-Series is some simple bolt-on aluminum components like hoods and front fenders. However, since they already have a healthy lead over Ford in the transmission race there is no real rush to do do.

[oldshurst442]

Ford marketing has made everyone think they have invented the DI Turbo and the Aluminum body but they didn't. GM just needs to do a better job marketing their smart and careful engineering as it is very impressive but no one knows about it. Many still are shocked I have a Turbo DI 4 cylinder predating Ford in a 08 HHR. I even have more power than theirs yet today.

Music to my ears...

 

That sentenced reminded me of an argument I once had...

[Cmicasa the Great]

 

Ford marketing has made everyone think they have invented the DI Turbo and the Aluminum body but they didn't. GM just needs to do a better job marketing their smart and careful engineering as it is very impressive but no one knows about it. Many still are shocked I have a Turbo DI 4 cylinder predating Ford in a 08 HHR. I even have more power than theirs yet today.

Music to my ears...

 

That sentenced reminded me of an argument I once had...

 

 

 

Me as well.. with the biggest troll on this thread, no less, in a far away place I helped to create and.. see wither away.

 

GM marketing decided not to market Ecotec in the proper fashion that Ford decided to do with their Ecoboost. 260HP/260lbs of jump... in 2008 vs Ford's 240HP back then.. and 272HP 295lbs of jump vs Ford 245/275. 

[Cmicasa the Great]

Loving the CT6... seriously making me wonder if the power of my Stingray is enough.. and instead of the CTS-V.. I should opt for a shiny new CT6 3.0LTT Platinum

 

 

 

look at that stance... If U can't appreciate the subtle changes that they did to enhance this over the already magnificent CTS in terms of styling then U really are blind or were foolish enough to believe the ElMiraj was coming to production 3 years after it debuted as a concept AKA design study

[Drew Dowdell]

 

In the end it should be the total mass that matters and not the materials. Ford marketing has made everyone think they have invented the DI Turbo and the Aluminum body but they didn't. GM just needs to do a better job marketing their smart and careful engineering as it is very impressive but no one knows about it. Many still are shocked I have a Turbo DI 4 cylinder predating Ford in a 08 HHR. I even have more power than theirs yet today.

 

Ford really has done well with marketing and I can only hope GM catches up there. For once they have something good to market but yet they are still not doing as much marketing as they could or should do.

 

People today are so ignorant as they only know what the latest thing posted on their phone is true or not. Just look at the people who go out and interview people on the street on global news and politics. I just saw some guy ask people about Jon Bonjovi's run for president. They never even caught on to the joke when he said he was livin on a prayer.

 

These soft minds need to be mined and collected with info and excitement for the product anymore. If GM does not do it others will and do it with inferior product at that.

 Downsizing and ever increasing use of Aluminum is pretty much a given at this point. Not sure it is a worthwhile effort to criticize one's marketing for pronouncing the fact they are pushing both.

 

 

It would be great if the use of Aluminum in the F-150 were super effective, but they just barely undercut the GM twins that are all steel.   The difference between the two is about one loaded tool box.  Is the F-150 downsized at all?

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

 

 

In the end it should be the total mass that matters and not the materials. Ford marketing has made everyone think they have invented the DI Turbo and the Aluminum body but they didn't. GM just needs to do a better job marketing their smart and careful engineering as it is very impressive but no one knows about it. Many still are shocked I have a Turbo DI 4 cylinder predating Ford in a 08 HHR. I even have more power than theirs yet today.

 

Ford really has done well with marketing and I can only hope GM catches up there. For once they have something good to market but yet they are still not doing as much marketing as they could or should do.

 

People today are so ignorant as they only know what the latest thing posted on their phone is true or not. Just look at the people who go out and interview people on the street on global news and politics. I just saw some guy ask people about Jon Bonjovi's run for president. They never even caught on to the joke when he said he was livin on a prayer.

 

These soft minds need to be mined and collected with info and excitement for the product anymore. If GM does not do it others will and do it with inferior product at that.

 Downsizing and ever increasing use of Aluminum is pretty much a given at this point. Not sure it is a worthwhile effort to criticize one's marketing for pronouncing the fact they are pushing both.

 

 

It would be great if the use of Aluminum in the F-150 were super effective, but they just barely undercut the GM twins that are all steel.   The difference between the two is about one loaded tool box.  Is the F-150 downsized at all?

 

Comparable truck weight difference is about 350lbs. 

But it’s all relative. The new F-150 gained size and capability from previous gen, which was long in the tooth and heavy out of the gate, yet still managed to shed 500lbs relative to previous gen truck (up to 700 maximum lbs).  Not an easy task.  I presume if Ford were to keep the truck mostly steel with this new generation, they could have still shed about 150-200lbs, just as GM did with their new generation.  It’s all relative.

 

And more weight reduction is coming.  They are not done.  

[El Kabong]

In the end it should be the total mass that matters and not the materials. Ford marketing has made everyone think they have invented the DI Turbo and the Aluminum body but they didn't. GM just needs to do a better job marketing their smart and careful engineering as it is very impressive but no one knows about it. Many still are shocked I have a Turbo DI 4 cylinder predating Ford in a 08 HHR. I even have more power than theirs yet today.

 

Ford really has done well with marketing and I can only hope GM catches up there. For once they have something good to market but yet they are still not doing as much marketing as they could or should do.

 

People today are so ignorant as they only know what the latest thing posted on their phone is true or not. Just look at the people who go out and interview people on the street on global news and politics. I just saw some guy ask people about Jon Bonjovi's run for president. They never even caught on to the joke when he said he was livin on a prayer.

 

These soft minds need to be mined and collected with info and excitement for the product anymore. If GM does not do it others will and do it with inferior product at that.

 Downsizing and ever increasing use of Aluminum is pretty much a given at this point. Not sure it is a worthwhile effort to criticize one's marketing for pronouncing the fact they are pushing both.

 

It would be great if the use of Aluminum in the F-150 were super effective, but they just barely undercut the GM twins that are all steel.   The difference between the two is about one loaded tool box.  Is the F-150 downsized at all?

Comparable truck weight difference is about 350lbs. 

But it’s all relative. The new F-150 gained size and capability from previous gen, which was long in the tooth and heavy out of the gate, yet still managed to shed 500lbs relative to previous gen truck (up to 700 maximum lbs).  Not an easy task.  I presume if Ford were to keep the truck mostly steel with this new generation, they could have still shed about 150-200lbs, just as GM did with their new generation.  It’s all relative.

 

And more weight reduction is coming.  They are not done.

Actually the weight difference as per C/D's last comparo, which you can read all about here:

http://m.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2015-chevrolet-silverado-vs-2015-ford-f-150-2015-ram-1500-2014-toyota-tundra-comparison-test

...was only 81 pounds. With lower max payload and towing specs than the Silverado. And the same observed FE. And an as-tested price five grand more. And less interior volume up front. And two less gear ratios in the transmission. And a slower time in the quarter-mile.

Seems like not much payoff for such a big gamble, is what I'm saying

[Drew Dowdell]

 

 

 

In the end it should be the total mass that matters and not the materials. Ford marketing has made everyone think they have invented the DI Turbo and the Aluminum body but they didn't. GM just needs to do a better job marketing their smart and careful engineering as it is very impressive but no one knows about it. Many still are shocked I have a Turbo DI 4 cylinder predating Ford in a 08 HHR. I even have more power than theirs yet today.

 

Ford really has done well with marketing and I can only hope GM catches up there. For once they have something good to market but yet they are still not doing as much marketing as they could or should do.

 

People today are so ignorant as they only know what the latest thing posted on their phone is true or not. Just look at the people who go out and interview people on the street on global news and politics. I just saw some guy ask people about Jon Bonjovi's run for president. They never even caught on to the joke when he said he was livin on a prayer.

 

These soft minds need to be mined and collected with info and excitement for the product anymore. If GM does not do it others will and do it with inferior product at that.

 Downsizing and ever increasing use of Aluminum is pretty much a given at this point. Not sure it is a worthwhile effort to criticize one's marketing for pronouncing the fact they are pushing both.

 

 

It would be great if the use of Aluminum in the F-150 were super effective, but they just barely undercut the GM twins that are all steel.   The difference between the two is about one loaded tool box.  Is the F-150 downsized at all?

 

Comparable truck weight difference is about 350lbs. 

But it’s all relative. The new F-150 gained size and capability from previous gen, which was long in the tooth and heavy out of the gate, yet still managed to shed 500lbs relative to previous gen truck (up to 700 maximum lbs).  Not an easy task.  I presume if Ford were to keep the truck mostly steel with this new generation, they could have still shed about 150-200lbs, just as GM did with their new generation.  It’s all relative.

 

And more weight reduction is coming.  They are not done.  

 

 

For that much aluminum (and bragging), I would expect a greater amount of mass reduction.  The actual weight reduction is much less than what you cite, but even still, 300 is about how much lighter the CT6 is verses an all steel car of the same size and there is a lot less wiggle room for weight reduction in a sedan than in a truck.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

Come on Drew, you are a bright guy, do you really think all that aluminum only contributes to an 81lb weight savings? Does the physics add up in your mind? It comes down to relativity, as I said. Two normal males can pick up the new F-150 bed and the cab fairly easily.  Try that with steel.  Not so easy.

 

Regardless, Ford did not just target weight reduction, as mentioned. Their payload is far more than the GM truck, plus more towing too. But where the truck really benefits is less top heaviness, better NVH, better handling, tougher panels that resist simple dents, no more rusting beds flapping in the wind, etc.  And I hear they are already targeting more weight reduction, through lessons learned in the entire process.  My guess, they over engineering much of it.  So although I have no problems with using the latest engineered steel in vehicles, you do reach a limit, which they appeared to have done.