Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion Automotive news and discussion about upcoming vehicles

More G8 news.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 12, 2007 | 07:38 PM
  #31  
georgejetson's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 689
Originally Posted by teal98
I sat in the three LXs again yesterday at the autoshow (San Jose, where it's actually colder than Detroit! -- 34F last night), and I really don't like the high beltline.
I don't either. In particular, I think the lousy rear visibility on the Magnum has absolutely killed it as a family car -- and that was supposed to be its reason for being, a muscle car that guys could sell the wife on.
Old Jan 12, 2007 | 09:55 PM
  #32  
91_z28_4me's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,600
From: Pewee Valley, KY
Originally Posted by Z284ever
No such straight six planned which I know of. Count on turbos though.
Could not the Daewoo 2.5 I6 be enlarged or enhanced to make it more powerful and rev happy?
Old Jan 13, 2007 | 03:16 AM
  #33  
teal98's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
Originally Posted by 91_z28_4me
Could not the Daewoo 2.5 I6 be enlarged or enhanced to make it more powerful and rev happy?
Is it still in production? Since it only produced 155hp, one would have to conclude it was enhanceable. Whether it's worth the trouble enhancing is quite another thing.
Old Jan 13, 2007 | 09:35 AM
  #34  
91_z28_4me's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,600
From: Pewee Valley, KY
Originally Posted by teal98
Is it still in production? Since it only produced 155hp, one would have to conclude it was enhanceable. Whether it's worth the trouble enhancing is quite another thing.
If it could be enlarged to say 3.2 L and made to rev higher the HP output could rise by quite a bit. I think the engine is tuned for economy right now, and is mated to a slushbox only.
Old Jan 13, 2007 | 07:46 PM
  #35  
Z284ever's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
I like I6's as well. If GM had a compelling need for a compact I6, I'd imagine they would base it on the Ecotec's architecture, rather than the Daewoo unit. They just have too much developement invested in Ecotec at this point, which could be easily applied to a six banger version.

Anyway, if they were to use a six, it would be a V6 - but they aren't.

Why?

Because when work starts on a new car arhitecture, everyone is trying to put their 2 cents into it. They'll look at this small, affordable, RWD platform, designed around a 4 cylinder powerplant and say, let's re-do it to fit a V6. The next guy says let's add this or that. We get mission creep. Our originally envisaged small and affordable platform suddenly becomes neither small nor affordable.

Last edited by Z284ever; Jan 13, 2007 at 07:48 PM.
Old Jan 13, 2007 | 08:46 PM
  #36  
z28luvr01's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 54
No Daewoo engines in a Pontiac, please.
Old Jan 13, 2007 | 10:16 PM
  #37  
Good Ph.D's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,597
From: Mack and Bewick
Originally Posted by Z284ever
Because when work starts on a new car arhitecture, everyone is trying to put their 2 cents into it. They'll look at this small, affordable, RWD platform, designed around a 4 cylinder powerplant and say, let's re-do it to fit a V6. The next guy says let's add this or that. We get mission creep. Our originally envisaged small and affordable platform suddenly becomes neither small nor affordable.
Thats the first sensible explanation Ive heard.

My other question would be how much differentiation can you really have between small kappa based RWD 4bangers...I can imagine anything other than one model in four different configurations... Coupe, Sedan, Vert, Wagon?
Old Jan 13, 2007 | 11:07 PM
  #38  
Slappy3243's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,398
From: Fairfax Station, VA. Formally Long Island :(
So Sexy! I would trade the GTO in for one of these





Old Jan 14, 2007 | 12:06 AM
  #39  
Z284ever's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Originally Posted by Good Ph.D
Thats the first sensible explanation Ive heard.

My other question would be how much differentiation can you really have between small kappa based RWD 4bangers...I can imagine anything other than one model in four different configurations... Coupe, Sedan, Vert, Wagon?
I can only guess. But probably as much differentiation as a G6 coupe has to a Malibu or 9-3 convertible.

And it won't be just Pontiacs either.
Old Jan 14, 2007 | 02:05 AM
  #40  
teal98's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
Originally Posted by Z284ever
I like I6's as well. If GM had a compelling need for a compact I6, I'd imagine they would base it on the Ecotec's architecture, rather than the Daewoo unit. They just have too much developement invested in Ecotec at this point, which could be easily applied to a six banger version.

Anyway, if they were to use a six, it would be a V6 - but they aren't.

Why?

Because when work starts on a new car arhitecture, everyone is trying to put their 2 cents into it. They'll look at this small, affordable, RWD platform, designed around a 4 cylinder powerplant and say, let's re-do it to fit a V6. The next guy says let's add this or that. We get mission creep. Our originally envisaged small and affordable platform suddenly becomes neither small nor affordable.
I would prefer they target a V6, but it makes more sense to target a 4. I just like the sound of a 6 better
Old Jan 14, 2007 | 04:00 AM
  #41  
JB'z 94's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 664
From: Hanford, CA, USA
I think the 6 makes sense if Cadillac is supposed to get one of them. Otherwise, the Ecotec will do everything they need it too.

P.S. seeing more and more pics of the commodore. I think the fact that you can throw some wheels on it with a lip, unless you run into fitment issues with the caliper. One thing I dislike about the CTS-V is the fact that it allows for virtually no lip. The Camaro concept also looks like it can fit a nice lip. I have a 3" lip on my BMW's wheels and I love a wheel with lip lol

Last edited by JB'z 94; Jan 14, 2007 at 04:09 AM.
Old Jan 14, 2007 | 04:04 AM
  #42  
Good Ph.D's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,597
From: Mack and Bewick
The talk about an entry Caddy was based on Torano, but I dont know if anyone is still working on that.
Old Jan 14, 2007 | 06:31 AM
  #43  
georgejetson's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 689
Originally Posted by Z284ever
I like I6's as well. If GM had a compelling need for a compact I6, I'd imagine they would base it on the Ecotec's architecture,
I agree -- and in the right lightweight RWD car that'd be a fun package. (And guys, there are actually compelling arguments for a I6 vs a V6 in a sport sedan. Not for nothing did Lexus put an I6 in the first-gen IS300. Not for nothing does BMW continue to make them the mainstay of their product line even though a V6 would be much easier to package. Oh well.)

When do you think we'll see the first Alpha concept? Any chance there will be one at Chicago?
Old Jan 14, 2007 | 06:32 AM
  #44  
georgejetson's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 689
Originally Posted by Good Ph.D
The talk about an entry Caddy was based on Torano, but I dont know if anyone is still working on that.
I thought the Torano thing got shut down because it was too far from existing platforms and they didn't want to develop a new one? Am I misremembering?
Old Jan 14, 2007 | 08:41 AM
  #45  
Z284ever's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Originally Posted by georgejetson
When do you think we'll see the first Alpha concept? Any chance there will be one at Chicago?
Not for a long time, years from now.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:30 AM.