My point is..everyone acts like now because GM is under the government's wings, their cars are magically gonna be better engineered, more efficiant and profitable, lighter, and take half the time to develop. My point is that there will be compromise somewhere since the main goal is getting GM back to profitability above all else. If you ask for better, faster, and cheaper...you normally only at best end up with two of those.

I guess what I am saying is...government intervention creates cars like the K-Car...not BMW fighters.

 

Umm, yeah... I don't buy it. Everything I know says that the problem was at the VERY top. So, until we see some healthy bloodshed from the board, I think GM will continue to be the same horribly ran company.

Good... There is no reason it ever should've been killed. Just as there is no reason we shouldn't be driving a whole line Zeta cars right now (until Alpha finally gets here)

That's the beauty of GM (or was the beauty anyway) You could have your cake (Epsilon) and eat it too (Alpha) Except, GM wasn't smart enough to leverage all of its assets.


With 2 divisions, government intervention and no money...

LOL... I highly doubt that.

If GM has enough divisions and resources to cover the ENTIRE market (like they should've been doing all along) then maybe. GM needs to maintain it's 5 core divisions IMO.

 

Possibly... The idea has been around for a while and it all depends on how flexible GM wants to make Alpha.

I'm pretty sure Chevy will HAVE to be a part of the equation in order for GM to have the volume to make money on the program.

 

I think so too, regardless of whether that car is the 6th gen Camaro or not.

 

I get nervous when people start talking about the Alpha for all sizes (Impala to 3-series), because there tend to be compromises when you try to stretch too far. It's not always the case, but it costs extra $$$ to iron out the compromises, and I don't GM having much extra $$$.

That would be nice. So when Shannon says, “The new one would be a proper Cadillac with a dedicated architecture and content”? Is it just being misleading? Or would Alpha Chevy be different enough from Alpha Caddy to be a different architecture?

 

I agree.


They'll need to fill a whole assembly line because GM's intent is to make this one profitable. It ain't happening without Chevy.

 

Yeah.. I agree. I certainly don't want Alpha to become another 'compromised by too many voices' platform. However; 1) Alpha is GM's only major focus right now (no new platforms are schedule for a long time) and 2) It's becoming increasingly apparent that GM does not want more than one RWD platform. (It probably couldn't even afford more than one now)



I think they mean that Cadillac will take the lead development of the project (as they have been doing for a year or so now) So, the program will be Cadillac's baby and will not be compromised for other divisions.

Zeta was essentially "compromised" by Holden and that's why Cadillac wanted the lead on Alpha so badly. (Same thing happened with Sigma.. Started out global, Cadillac whined, and it came stateside. Hence why we had V and Sigma instead of just Sigma)

Now, whether that's a good thing or not remains to be seen. It was a HORRIBLE thing with Sigma because Cadillac raised the price point for the architecture beyond what the other divisions could charge. (The Sigma was originally to be Cadillac, Chevy and Buick IIRC)

So, will the drive be a good one? CERTAINLY. Will the next Camaro be affordable?

 

Hmm. So Cadillac will probably get an exclusive for a year or two. According to GMI, the Epsilon II will be used for the large Cadillac. So that means Alpha for the 3-sized and 5-sized cars and AWD EPII for the 7-sized cars.

Until plans change again

I wonder if Chevy would even call an Alpha coupe a Camaro if it's I4 and V6 only? FWIW, probably only a few rabid enthusiasts would complain about lacking a V8 when a V6 could put out 350hp in a car weighing 34-3500 pounds. Especially in times of 35-43mpg CAFE.

 

they shouldn't call it camaro. a camaro needs a V8 option. now they could call it someting else (vega, monza or even a new name) and not suffer the "how can it be a camaro without a V8" question all the time.

 

We'll see how things play out. Who knows what the automotive landscape might look like circa '13-'14.


But, if the 2014 Mustang has an available V8, there's a pretty good chance the 2014 Camaro will too. But it's safe to say that the volume versions of both will be powered by 4 cylinders and get 35-ish mpg.

 

Count me as a rabid enthusiast... I'll not own a Camaro that doesn't have a V8.

 

I think at some point, the timing will be right for "enthusiasts" to apply pressure to this process.
It's probably abit soon for that now.

At this stage of the game, if a 6th gen Alpha Camaro is being considered, there is probably a team of afew guys looking at what the competition might be doing mid-next decade. On a big board, they'll have the Genny Coupe, 370Z, Eclipse, BMW1/3, Civic Si, Infiniti G coupe, and some others. In the middle of that board will be the 2014 Mustang with a big honking bullseye on it. If that Mustang has an available "Coyote" V8, Camaro fans are in good shape.

 

i don't mind if it has 4cyl or 6 cyl engines in it but it needs a V8 too. a camaro without a V8 option is not a camaro. if a V8 is not in the cards thats fine too but just call it something else.

 

What if the V8 option adds $10K to $15K? That's probably what it would have to be to redesign a platform optimized for an I4 to take a V8, given the volumes you could expect of a V8 in the future. Of course, if you optimize the platform for a V8, then it would be less, but the I4 would be too chunky.

 

well the V8 option IS 10k more for me. like i said build a 4/6cyl 2+2 coupe i may even buy one just don't call it camaro.