Motor Trend: Caddy Alpha a "go" for 2011.

http://image.motortrend.com/f/10938483/112_0811_01z+alpha_cadillac+illustration.jpg

http://www.motortrend.com/future/future_vehicles/112_0811_alpha_platform_cadillac_confirmed/index.html

Well, that's very good news. Both for Cadillac fans and for the future of Camaro. As long as there's a next generation small RWD platform, there's hope for a 6th Gen. Maybe even one Z284ever will buy!

Maybe even one Z284ever will buy!

Nah, by then he will be to old. Heck he is already driving a Caddy, the last step is a Buick!:p

Nah, by then he will be to old. Heck he is already driving a Caddy, the last step is a Buick!:p

:lol:It's a cold cold place in this forum

Great news, but I'm going to wait until details about the finished product come out. Let's hope they don't lose focus on the purpose of this platform - and build in allowances for the small block. :)

It's sad that Pontiac got screwed out of this chassis.

Nah, by then he will be to old. Heck he is already driving a Caddy, the last step is a Buick!:p

Ha. Ha. Very funny. :D

It looks like Buick might get it's very own Alpha.:p

But...if the 6th gen Camaro comes out nice, I may actually get more than one. ;)

It looks like Buick might get it's very own Alpha.:p


See he is already considering it.:lol:

I'll believe the Camaro on alpha theory when I see something concrete from someone from within GM. :irk:

I'll believe the Camaro on alpha theory when I see something concrete from someone from within GM. :irk:

Apparently, Cadillac needs Chevy to get in on Alpha in order to spread costs. And I'm sure Chevy doesn't want to get stuck footing that whole bill for the Oshawa Zeta line for very long either.

Things are developing..........

looks very Volt like in shape...

imagine an all electric caddy??

Few items.

1. No Cadillac doesn't need Chevrolet to spread the cost of the RWD.

The chassis is being developed by Holden using the Zeta as the stepoff. The car is viewed as a replacement or a running mate for the current Commodore. Big cars in Australia are on a downswing, and Holden won't get a smaller RWD car unless GM can use it in other global models.

2. Pontiac didn't get "screwed" out of this chassis.

Here's simplified view of the 2 ways it works.
a) A new architecture is developed. Different divisions submit ideas based on marketing research. GM coordinates and prioritizes these ideas and such based on need and money. Camaro is a prime example.
b) GM sees a need for a model to be in a division's lineup, so they assign it and the division has the opportunity to veto it. Buick did that with the Park Avenue and Chevrolet did this with the El Camino.

Pontiac can still put in for an so-called Alpha. However, looking at the current sales of the G6, I would venture to say that it just might be Pontiac that is refusing the so-called Alpha in favor of continuing on Espilon.

3. Anyone expecting the Alpha to be this lightweight uber chassis with V8 engines, you are going to be sorely dissappointed.

The chassis is being built around the 4 cylinder and V6 engine. The car will also have a similar weight to the Espilon, around 35-3600 pounds for V6 sedans (again, RWD w/ IRS makes for a heavier car than FWD or RWD w/ live axles).

4. Keep in mind that news going into a car magazine is at least 2 to 3 months old.

A typical magazine has to be "put to bed" (ready for printing) 1 to 1 1/2 month before it appears on the newstands. Also, Motor Trend has a recent history of being way offbase. It was at it's prime regarding future models about 8-10 years ago, but has been pretty spotty the past 5.

Also remember, that is an artist's interpetation of the new Cadillac, not an actual picture or a drawing from a person who actually saw it or described it to an artist.


As mentioned, the chassis is based on the Zeta and isn't a new-from-the-ground-up structure. Since it won't be made for the abuse of up to 500 horsepower and that same amount of torque, the components (ie: rear IRS & it's substructure) don't need to weigh as much. In other words, to simplify (or oversimplify), what Holden is responsible for doing is taking the Kappa suspension parts and the Zeta chassis and creating a vehicle the size of an Espilon or Audi A4 that's perhaps a bit wider than either. That's your "so called" Alpha (I call it "Zeta-lite" ;) ) .

The most expensive and time consuming part of engineering a car is engineering and certifying it's suspension components. Everything else is done and simulated on computer now, right up to crash testing. It's all pretty cool, actually. Using the Kappa components and a good portion of Zeta structure, GM bypasses years of work and a countless amount of money, and can have this new ready for prototype almost as soon as the ink drys on the approval papers. It's a pretty straightforward project.


As for who gets the car, Holden makes the V6 locally and Cadillac is moving towards that V6 in all cars, so Cadillac is the natural partner in all this. A version will go to Opel and Vauxhall. At this moment those are the only divisions on at the table. Any division can sign on after the car is done, and have their own version in the showroom within 12-18 months.

My opinion, based on the bits I know (and winkie club membership)?

a) Cadillac will get a sports sedan off this chassis.
b) Pontiac will not unless the Commodore is discontinued. Odds favor a coupe.
c) Chevrolet might get a sedan off this model, but don't bet on it.
d) There will not be a Camaro based on this chassis unless it loses the V8.
e) Buick will get a car off this chassis, most likely a coupe, probably the new Riviera.

At the risk of having to endure a longwinded, page long, diatribe on why I'm wrong.....

Nope.

Alpha will be ALL NEW, not based on Zeta.
It will be engineered and manufactured in North America.

I'll just leave it at that......

Well, unless things have changed in the past week, Holden is still the "homeroom" for GM's RWD cars save the Corvette & last I spoke to anyone (again, about a week) that's the key item on their plate right now.

Like the Zeta program, GM-NA is involved, and Bob Lutz moved around some development work from teams who were overtaxed to teams that were affected by some of the programs GM has cancelled or placed on hold and have less work than they should.

It's not "all new" in the way you seem to think (unless you think the Camaro structure is "all new" ;) ).

Of course, there will be a version manufactured here in the US. The US is now one of the cheapest places to manufacture cars because of the wrecked dollar and the UAW assuming the costs of retiree's medical benefits. GM has a few empty or 1/4 used plants they are looking at.

..... see.... done on less than a full page.

The way I see it, and I am not "in the club" of course, Alpha has to spawn the 6th Gen Camaro, or there won't be one. Unless CAFE and gasoline issues simply disappear over the next few years, Zeta won't survive. And GM can't throw development money at two distinct small(er) RWD platforms.

It's Alpha or bust.

The way I see it, and I am not "in the club" of course, Alpha has to spawn the 6th Gen Camaro, or there won't be one. Unless CAFE and gasoline issues simply disappear over the next few years, Zeta won't survive. And GM can't throw development money at two distinct small(er) RWD platforms.

It's Alpha or bust.


Don't worry Wilson, that club thing is just a bunch of BS.

But if there were such a club - that post would get you in. :D

Also remember, that is an artist's interpetation of the new Cadillac, not an actual picture or a drawing from a person who actually saw it or described it to an artist.
Yeah, pretty sure that's just the Torana concept with some Cadillac details.

http://image.motortrend.com/f/10938483/112_0811_01z+alpha_cadillac+illustration.jpg

http://img234.imageshack.us/img234/5867/holdentt36toranahatchconcept004cc2.jpg
(pink car! :D)

The way I see it, and I am not "in the club" of course, Alpha has to spawn the 6th Gen Camaro, or there won't be one. Unless CAFE and gasoline issues simply disappear over the next few years, Zeta won't survive. And GM can't throw development money at two distinct small(er) RWD platforms.

It's Alpha or bust.

Not really. If you believe Guy and Alpha is just a derivative of Zeta with lighter/smaller (Kappa?) components for a smaller RWD Cadillac; then large Zeta and small Zeta (Alpha) could be developed side-by-side without much impact one way or the other. However, if you believe Charlie that Alpha is not a derivative of Zeta, but in fact new smaller RWD architecture, then yes, it would be quite expensive to have two distinct and separate RWD platforms and GM would have to develop more products off of each to make both viable moving foreword.

I for one, would not purchase a 3-series sized Camaro, regardless of what it looks like or performs like. If GM decides to move Camaro over to Alpha, then this 5th gen Camaro may be the last new Camaro I end up purchasing. Therefore, I am a member of the group that would like to see GM evolve Zeta for the near future, or until a more suitable platform arises for Camaro. Is Alpha a more suitable platform for Camaro? In my mind it isn't. It would be more appropriate for a RWD version of Malibu. :p

That doesn't mean others' opinions are wrong; they just differ from mine.

Interesting stuff coming to light here.

We have 2 well known insiders who are usually fairly close w/ information bringing 2 things to the 'table'. Project 1 is a smaller, lighter, more economical evolution of the Zeta chassis and project 2 is a smaller, lighter, more economical new chassis.

Since redundancy is quite common w/in the walls of GM what are the odds that the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing and that both projects are being worked?

Zeta could be getting work to make it more economical and its lifespan longer (thus improving return on investment) and could still be larger than the Alpha chassis which sounds as is GMNA is running completely.

I wouldn't say it is out of the question that both guys are right when talking about their specific projects but we are seeing conflict when both ideas are brought up together.

GM doesn't have much money. Why would they spend the money they do have on a "ground up" low volume RWD platform? I think it's adapted from current chassis'. My questions are - Can Zeta shrink to 3 series size? And if so, why the hell didn't they do it for Camaro?

GM doesn't have much money. Why would they spend the money they do have on a "ground up" low volume RWD platform? I think it's adapted from current chassis'. My questions are - Can Zeta shrink to 3 series size? And if so, why the hell didn't they do it for Camaro?

That my friend is the $500 Million question!

Which one to believe? Just know that when info comes from a "source" at GM these days chances are the info can change fast so many grains of salt are needed. Even if Bob Lutz came on here and said the next Camaro would be Alpha based I still wouldn't hold my breath until we saw a test car or better yet a production car. This Alpha has been made to be the pie in the sky and while I'm hopeful I'm still skeptical.

GM doesn't have much money. Why would they spend the money they do have on a "ground up" low volume RWD platform? I think it's adapted from current chassis'. My questions are - Can Zeta shrink to 3 series size? And if so, why the hell didn't they do it for Camaro?


After being of secondary importance for the past year or two, Alpha has quickly moved up the priority list. I don't know if this is the top priority at Cadillac, but it has certainly become a top priority. Cadillac knows that it needs a small premium car if it expects to ever become a serious player globally. And with changes in the North American market, it knows it needs such a car here as well. Now that the DT7 (DTS replacement) is dead and CTS matriculates it's way towards being a 5 series/E-class competitor, Alpha literally becomes critical for Cadillac.


I have no doubt that Holden may have lobbied hard to be Alpha's homeroom. Holden is running out of engineering work, now that the Zeta DT7 team assembled in Australia, has been disbanded and re-assigned. They could really use a project like this. Afterall, Holden did come up with the fantastic Torana concept and that was a direction which the 5th gen, conceptually, could have possibly gone in.

Cadillac however, insists on control over Alpha, and it has gotten it. Don't underestimate the political pull which Cadillac wields within the corporation.

Can Zeta be cutdown to 3series sized. Come on, don't you think I've already asked that question? ;) The answer is a big fat NO. If it could, TRUST ME, the Camaro team would have been all over that.

Oh yeah, and as far as "low volume" goes, well, that's where Chevy comes in to the picture. :)

Oh yeah, and as far as "low volume" goes, well, that's where Chevy comes in to the picture. :)

Ok, so what will be the "high volume" Chevy products? Camaro? I guess after being stuck the way F5 was, any additional volume makes the Camaro look better commercially. So what else can we stick on Alpha? Kappa with an actual trunk? X3-like SUV? Unibody Luv ;)

Ok, so what will be the "high volume" Chevy products? Camaro? I guess after being stuck the way F5 was, any additional volume makes the Camaro look better commercially. So what else can we stick on Alpha? Kappa with an actual trunk? X3-like SUV? Unibody Luv ;)

Well, don't forget, BMW does some pretty good global volume with the 3. Off the top of my head I want to say 300K or so annual units - most of that in Europe and the US. Pretty damned good, especially for premium products. Wouldn't it be good for GM to get that kind of action?

There are afew different Alpha proposals. Sedan, coupe, convertible, even a sportwagon I believe.

Beyond a "Camaro", Chevy might even possibly get a sedan. And Buick is eyeing a version too, not so much for the NA market (although it may be sold here as well), but for China.

Start adding them all up, and Alpha could eventually deliver the volume which Zeta never did.

Start adding them all up, and Alpha could eventually deliver the volume which Zeta never did.

To be fair Zeta never had the shot to deliver the kind of volume that Alpha theoretically could. It got put on hold for 6 months and basically half of it was shuttered. Then the high volume Impala gets canned, now the Buick/Caddy LWB cars are gone. Really the Commodore and Camaro can't be expected to hit to high of a sales target since 1 is a niche model and while the other is nice, it has very strong production constraints.

Well, don't forget, BMW does some pretty good global volume with the 3. Off the top of my head I want to say 300K or so annual units - most of that in Europe and the US. Pretty damned good, especially for premium products. Wouldn't it be good for GM to get that kind of action?

Actually more like 500K. But you're right that you have to look at the global picture -- this is a platform they can sell everywhere, not just AU/US/ME.

There was a piece in Automotive News a couple of weeks ago that was very similar to this, but also stating that they're shooting for introduction in 2010. If this is a ground-up design, they've either been working on this for a while, or they started a while ago.

If you believe Guy and Alpha is just a derivative of Zeta with lighter/smaller (Kappa?) components for a smaller RWD Cadillac; then large Zeta and small Zeta (Alpha) could be developed side-by-side without much impact one way or the other. However, if you believe Charlie that Alpha is not a derivative of Zeta, but in fact new smaller RWD architecture, then yes, it would be quite expensive to have two distinct and separate RWD platforms and GM would have to develop more products off of each to make both viable moving foreword.

I honestly don't know who to believe at this point. Right or wrong, I do believe that a 3900 pound Zeta Camaro can't be long for this world in an era of $4/gallon or higher gas. Not in the kinds of numbers it needs to be anyway. If things continue as they are, I'm afraid that the car would be an easy target for the axe, especially as the inevitible happens anyway and sales start to slide after year three or four on the market.

Even if Alpha is just a smaller derivitive of Zeta, if fuel prices do not stabilize and the country is still obsessed with MPGs, it would make little sense to try to mass-market a 3900 pound coupe when you already have an architecture that supports a smaller, lighter coupe and gets a few more of those MPGs.

Is Alpha a more suitable platform for Camaro? In my mind it isn't. It would be more appropriate for a RWD version of Malibu. :p

As opposed to the Chevelle-in-Camaro-Clothing we're getting now? ;) All I'm asking for is something in between the two. And if Alpha isn't being designed to support the physical size of, and handle the load of, a small block then it makes me even more nervous about Camaro's ultimate future.

There was a piece in Automotive News a couple of weeks ago that was very similar to this, but also stating that they're shooting for introduction in 2010. If this is a ground-up design, they've either been working on this for a while, or they started a while ago.

2010 is too early. 2011 might be pushing it too.

Some work, (I'm not sure how much, but certiainly engineering "math" and some styling proposals), has been previously completed, but the program was parked on the back burner for the past few months to a year - or more.

According to the leaked UAW documents which circulated the internet last year, Lordstown Ohio is where these cars will be assembled. Sounds like Lordstown will be very busy in the upcoming years. Good for Ohio.

GM doesn't have much money. Why would they spend the money they do have on a "ground up" low volume RWD platform? I think it's adapted from current chassis'. My questions are - Can Zeta shrink to 3 series size? And if so, why the hell didn't they do it for Camaro?

If I had to guess, I would say a shrinking of Zeta could only go so far due to the rear suspension. You might be able to knock a lot out of the Zeta wheelbase but without a redesign of the rear suspension it could be as wide as it is long :lol:


A "Zeta-Lite" with Kappa suspension would get around this issue.

If I had to guess, I would say a shrinking of Zeta could only go so far due to the rear suspension. You might be able to knock a lot out of the Zeta wheelbase but without a redesign of the rear suspension it could be as wide as it is long :lol:


A "Zeta-Lite" with Kappa suspension would get around this issue.

Something to consider: Kappa's suspension is probably abit too delicated to support a Zeta massed car.

Oh yes, I ask lots of hypothetical questions. :)

Something to consider: Kappa's suspension is probably abit too delicated to support a Zeta massed car.
Did you mean to say delicate, or dedicated?
Both could apply, but one makes more sense than the other....

Did you mean to say delicate, or dedicated?
Both could apply, but one makes more sense than the other....

Delicate. Where's my damned reading glasses?! :lol:

Delicate. Where's my damned reading glasses?! :lol:
:p
Cool...that's what I thought you meant. Now can I ask what you mean by that?

My thoughts would be that if they were re-engineering Zeta (which, no offense, Charlie...but it does seem more likely to be the case**), and producing a smaller, lighter version of it wouldn't require particularly robust parts - at least not much more robust than Kappa. And I couldn't see why they couldn't strengthen components where needed...:shrug:

**I just find it hard to comprehend that such an important platform could be accelerated to market as fast as it seems to have been. I'd be worried about quality issues and the like if this were the case.

What are the chances of a two-team "sports bike" group again?
What if its GM-NA vs Holden on making a smaller RWD platform? Obviously this is big for GM as they need to maintain a certain RWD platform, but it needs to be lighter as well as keep customers happy. So they would need a platform that could theoreticly go from a 1 to a 3 series, maybe a bit bigger, and then larger 5-7 series platform.

I also heard that Holden wanted to be home base for Alpha, but due to Caddy's major desire for the platform, along with UAW negotiations, and falling dollar, an Ameican designed and built car with the help of learnings from Kappa, Zeta, and Sigma, will now be taking the Alpha platform program.

But I also heard that Holden is moving fowad on a smaller Zeta or a modified Zeta now that they themselves are looking to downsize thier cars.
Downsizing is a must...problem is what stays, what goes, and what does the future hold?
To bring our beloved Camaro into this, Alpha's first ideas of being a 4/6cyl based car, wont this be tainted by bringing in a Camaro team with a large GenV V8 ready to go?
Thats the only thing I dont feel right about. Its like that HBO movie about the M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle. Started out as a great idea, a solution and replacement for the old MPV's. They put the M2 in front of some desk Generals and they brainstormed about a bunch of ideas about adding all these crazy things, made the whole thing go over budget, using dangerious aluminum armor when hit would give off this toxic gas that would kill everyone inside of it...and what we got was a lesser MPV then the last gen that could hold less troops, and have decreased range.

I also assume that since Alpha is in GM NA's hands...that a V8 is somehow being thought up by a small group. If Holden is to get this as a replacement for the Commodore, the V8 will be needed, even more so when Camaro and others are thrown into the picture.


BTW...I hope Guy does makes it to Indy. Id like to have this conversation over a few drinks along with Charlie and the rest of the crew there.

Another hypothetical situation, if Alpha is Zeta-lite and using some Kappa components that are not fit for a V8 with the grunt of the LS3 or higher.
And if we go by the rumor that Caddy wants the car to fight the 3 series across the globe and they want Chevy to help foot the development bill and fill plant space.
We know Caddy doesn't need a V8 to really fight the 3 Series, M's aside. Could Chevy be convinced to go forward on a Camaro w/o a V8?
- No V8 doesn't mean no Camaro but it does mean CAFE friendly.

Delicate. Where's my damned reading glasses?! :lol:

In your Buick!:p

:**I just find it hard to comprehend that such an important platform could be accelerated to market as fast as it seems to have been. I'd be worried about quality issues and the like if this were the case.


Well, they've been working on it for a couple of years now.

Another hypothetical situation, if Alpha is Zeta-lite and using some Kappa components that are not fit for a V8 with the grunt of the LS3 or higher.
And if we go by the rumor that Caddy wants the car to fight the 3 series across the globe and they want Chevy to help foot the development bill and fill plant space.
We know Caddy doesn't need a V8 to really fight the 3 Series, M's aside. Could Chevy be convinced to go forward on a Camaro w/o a V8?
- No V8 doesn't mean no Camaro but it does mean CAFE friendly.

Obviously, the whole "Zeta-lite" theory dealie could package a V8, sh!t even a supercharged V8. Right?
Well, I'm tellin' you guys, this thing has nothing to do with Zeta - this is a clean sheet.

Early on in Alpha's developement, 4 cylinders is all it was getting. It was later redesigned to accept a V6 at Cadillac's urging. I've been told that the engine bay will also accept a smallblock. But I detect that resistance could exist in releasing it with a V8.

So, you bring up a good question on an Alpha Camaro.

Getting back to Cadillac and it's desire to compete with the 3 series. My sense is that they really want to do this thing right. No excuses. So, I can't say that I know what BMW or for that matter MB or Audi have in store for the future, but currently the hyper performance, halo models of the 3, C-class and A4 all have V8's.

I honestly don't know who to believe at this point. Right or wrong, I do believe that a 3900 pound Zeta Camaro can't be long for this world in an era of $4/gallon or higher gas. Not in the kinds of numbers it needs to be anyway. If things continue as they are, I'm afraid that the car would be an easy target for the axe, especially as the inevitible happens anyway and sales start to slide after year three or four on the market.

Even if Alpha is just a smaller derivitive of Zeta, if fuel prices do not stabilize and the country is still obsessed with MPGs, it would make little sense to try to mass-market a 3900 pound coupe when you already have an architecture that supports a smaller, lighter coupe and gets a few more of those MPGs.

It seems really unlikely to me that you'd get a Camaro based on this Alpha chassis any time soon ...



As opposed to the Chevelle-in-Camaro-Clothing we're getting now? ;) All I'm asking for is something in between the two. And if Alpha isn't being designed to support the physical size of, and handle the load of, a small block then it makes me even more nervous about Camaro's ultimate future.

... because I can't imagine building a chassis for a V8 when the whole point is to provide a smaller and lighter car to get more MPG. It just doesn't make sense.

If you want a new V8 Camaro, I'd suggest a 2010 (or '11 or '12) model.

Getting back to Cadillac and it's desire to compete with the 3 series. My sense is that they really want to do this thing right. No excuses. So, I can't say that I know what BMW or for that matter MB or Audi have in store for the future, but currently the hyper performance, halo models of the 3, C-class and A4 all have V8's.

For now, but they have the same CAFE/CO2 issues that GM has. They all weigh 3600-3900 pounds too.

The new Audi S4 replaces a V8 with a supercharged V6. Unfortunately, it looks like it will still have about 3900 pounds to cart around. I'll be surprised if the next M3 and AMG C-Class come with V8s. If they do, they'll be even higher-end halo models, I predict.

For now, but they have the same CAFE/CO2 issues that GM has. They all weigh 3600-3900 pounds too.

The new Audi S4 replaces a V8 with a supercharged V6. Unfortunately, it looks like it will still have about 3900 pounds to cart around. I'll be surprised if the next M3 and AMG C-Class come with V8s. If they do, they'll be even higher-end halo models, I predict.

Yeah, it's anyone's guess. The Euro CO2 regs are going to be pretty severe.

But it also brings up the question of a Cadillac Alpha V version. As long as BMW has an M and MB has an AMG, I'm sure Caddy will push for a V. What will power it? GM was working on a 400 + hp turbo V6, but that's now been shelved.

For now, but they have the same CAFE/CO2 issues that GM has. They all weigh 3600-3900 pounds too.

The new Audi S4 replaces a V8 with a supercharged V6. Unfortunately, it looks like it will still have about 3900 pounds to cart around. I'll be surprised if the next M3 and AMG C-Class come with V8s. If they do, they'll be even higher-end halo models, I predict.

BMW also seems to be moving away from V8s implying that their TTI6 will be replacing their V8s and engines will be downsizing (as seen by the 4 cylinder 1-3 series engines coming to the US).

I can't imagine building a chassis for a V8 when the whole point is to provide a smaller and lighter car to get more MPG. It just doesn't make sense.

It might make sense using the theory that a lighter car wouldn't require as much horsepower to meet performance goals. Add direct injection technologies to that smaller V8 and you'd come out even further ahead of the game.

It might make sense using the theory that a lighter car wouldn't require as much horsepower to meet performance goals. Add direct injection technologies to that smaller V8 and you'd come out even further ahead of the game.

What would be a "smaller" V8? Are we talking displacement reduction or overall external packaging size.
Because the Gen III-IV LS series of engines are not large in that respect and they have not grown in external size either. Yet they have grown far more powerful and their displacement has gone up.
So while I think it would be easier to package say and LS3 into an Alpha than it would be to actually design components able to handle its well over 400hp/tq.

What would be a "smaller" V8? Are we talking displacement reduction or overall external packaging size.
Because the Gen III-IV LS series of engines are not large in that respect and they have not grown in external size either. Yet they have grown far more powerful and their displacement has gone up.
So while I think it would be easier to package say and LS3 into an Alpha than it would be to actually design components able to handle its well over 400hp/tq.

Okay, good, here's the meat and potatoes, let's think this through.

We already know that Cadillac has pushed through the capability for Alpha to package a DOHC, 300 + hp, ~ 275 lbs/ft V6. Would they package protect for the eventuality that a turbo V6 program might be taken out of mothballs?

Okay, let's say that a GEN V smallblock is very compact, (as are GEN III-IV) and physically fits. What would the additional issues be?

1) Torque capacity.
2) Overall front/rear balance.

If Alpha would be package protected for a turbo V6, which may produce 350- 375 lbs/ft of torque, would a GEN V ~ 5.0L smallblock, with 400hp and 375 lbs/ft add any addition drivetrain stress which would have to be addressed?

How much would a GEN V smallblock weigh compared to a DOHC V6 or a turbo, intercooled, DOHC V6?

We need someone who does this stuff for a living to give us some insight here..........

Well I would think that the DOHC 3.6 isn't that much lighter than the current V-8. After all, you've got all that valvetrain gear & extra wide cylinder heads to hold it. Add in a turbo & intercooler & I would think that you've lost any weight advantage right there. I also would think that it would be easier to just produce a pushrod V-8 that matches the turbo 6's torque output & have something that is cheaper & easier to build & install & would likely have fewer reliability concerns. The natural advantage of a simpler & more compact design. Just my .02.

The new supercharger in the LS9 and LSA (and I believe the same thing is in the new Audis) is quite a bit more efficient than the previous superchargers. According to an article in Corvette Enthusiast, it's something like 75hp versus 115hp at full power.

If you can package one in a 60 degree V, that's what I'd expect to see, since it's quite a bit lighter and easier to package than a twin turbo. If not, then....???

By the way, regarding fuel economy, the CAFE average has little to do with the consumer numbers that EPA reports. For example, the A6 CTS 3.6 has EPA numbers of 18/26, so you might think the combined number is 22, but it's not. The raw test data is 22.2 city and 36.7 hwy. IIRC, the combined number is 55% city and 45% highway, so the contribution to CAFE would be 28.725.

How much would a GEN V smallblock weigh compared to a DOHC V6 or a turbo, intercooled, DOHC V6?

We need someone who does this stuff for a living to give us some insight here..........

How much does the DI3.6 weight? Add ~65lbs for turbo'ing (~40lbs in turbos, ~12lbs in intercooler(s), ~7lbs in piping, ~4lbs in additional induction piping (assuming twins), break even on manifolds)

How much does the DI3.6 weight? Add ~65lbs for turbo'ing (~40lbs in turbos, ~12lbs in intercooler(s), ~7lbs in piping, ~4lbs in additional induction piping (assuming twins), break even on manifolds)

What about a supercharger?

Thinking about this a little more, if a DI 3.6 makes 300 or so horsepower, and the car weighs 3400 pounds, is a twin turbo setup really called for? I don't think the turbo is really worth doing unless you get another 100hp, and 400 seems like more than this concept (lightweight, relatively good gas mileage) calls for....

BMW needs the turbo to make a 3.0 behave like a 3.5 - 3.7l engine. GM doesn't.

How much does the DI3.6 weight? Add ~65lbs for turbo'ing (~40lbs in turbos, ~12lbs in intercooler(s), ~7lbs in piping, ~4lbs in additional induction piping (assuming twins), break even on manifolds)

Are there any different drivetrain or structural issues for a normally aspirated V8 vs a turbo V6, if they both produce comparable torque?

Are there any different drivetrain or structural issues for a normally aspirated V8 vs a turbo V6, if they both produce comparable torque?

All things being equal, shouldn't be any major issues.

Are there any different drivetrain or structural issues for a normally aspirated V8 vs a turbo V6, if they both produce comparable torque?
Not that I can think of. Another thing to think of in N/A V8 vs. Turbo V6 - The turbo's added weight can actually lower the car's center of gravity.

What about a supercharger?

Thinking about this a little more, if a DI 3.6 makes 300 or so horsepower, and the car weighs 3400 pounds, is a twin turbo setup really called for? I don't think the turbo is really worth doing unless you get another 100hp, and 400 seems like more than this concept (lightweight, relatively good gas mileage) calls for....

BMW needs the turbo to make a 3.0 behave like a 3.5 - 3.7l engine. GM doesn't.
It's really the same power wise. I'm not sure that Eaton currently has a TVS kit small enough for a V6. Maybe they are working on one. Turbo really is the way to go. Even if they use a variable compressor and keep it turned down. That is how they could make sure they have a flat torque band while still getting the 400+hp. See the LNF

It's really the same power wise. I'm not sure that Eaton currently has a TVS kit small enough for a V6. Maybe they are working on one. Turbo really is the way to go. Even if they use a variable compressor and keep it turned down. That is how they could make sure they have a flat torque band while still getting the 400+hp. See the LNF

So do you think GM and Audi made a mistake by using S/C with their 90 degree V's?

It seemed to me that the improvement in efficiency might have altered the balance between S/C and T/C, but then maybe DI goes the other way with quicker spoolup of a turbo.

Packaging a turbo with a 90 degree V does seem more difficult, at least on the surface.

I have a feeling that packaging it into the Corvette chassis was a big reason for going with a blower instead of turbos. They increased the height of the engine, raised the hood a little, changed the pulley system, added an air/water intercooler and lines going between the blower and intercooler. With a turbo setup, they would have also needed to completely redesign the exhaust, fit the turbo(s) somewhere, used an air to air intercooler, and then the >3" tubing that has to hold pressure running between the turbo(s), intercooler, and throttlebody. Sure, the aftermarket can do it, but they don't have to meet the noise and durability standards that GM does.

I think it would be very cool to see something more along the lines of the turbo-in-the-valley setup that the new 4.5L diesel gets on a gas engine in the future.

Not that I can think of. Another thing to think of in N/A V8 vs. Turbo V6 - The turbo's added weight can actually lower the car's center of gravity.

Thanks!