A couple of more things.

-Don't know for sure...but this a STRONG impression I have. The VE will end up being WAY more GM2800 than Sigma. In fact you may need a magnifying glass to find any Sigma influence in it at all.

-On the subject of IRS and Camaro. I can pretty much garauntee that the last Camaro that will ever be manufactured with a live rear axle was built 13 months ago.

 

So, what is known about GM2800 and why hasn't it been mentioned before?

 

GM2800 was the old Opel Omega platform (Cadillac Catera).....which Holden used to develop the V-series platform from.

 

I see....

Why does that make me cringe? Maybe it's the "Caddy that Zigs" line or that darn duck.

 

Current Commodore/GTO platform is a l-o-n-g way down the road from GM2800.
Remember, all this started when the beanies went berzerk in the US and the country became obsessed with trucks and forgot how to build cars.
To keep the Commodore alive in Australia, it went this way for the VT and the local engineers, under Tony Hyde, have shown they can make a dollar do the work of 10 and they're all pretty versatile. Individual US GM designers I know have done nothing but bumpers for 30 years. Max Wolff ran the entire VY program after less than two years with GM.
Since VT, Holden profits have been exceedingly strong and the car has dominated Australian sales. Holden built 145,000 cars last year - or shedloads more than Saab.
Now, under Peter Hanenberger, they've been given a bit of licence, but the conservative old fogies at GM would only allow adventurous behaviour on the condition that everything used the same platform.
Hanenberger agreed, then changed Holden's internal definition of what a "platform" actually was.
It went from being the bit everything sat on, to certain engineering hardpoints, like the suspension pickups, firewall, rear bulkhead and arches etc. Anything between those points became completely flexible.
So, essentially, there's not a lot of 2800 left in it, either.

Michael Taylor
Editor
MOTOR

 

Hmmmm....

There is a journalist within our midst....

Our usual quota is two, that being Guion and Branden...

We must huddle to examine this development...



"whisper...whisper...whisper..."

"Yes, but at least he's not from Motor Trend... that means he might know how to drive."

"whisper...whisper...whisper..."

"I know, drawing and quartering is the usual method for dealing with such things, but Pacer has his flamethrower at the ready, just in case.... oh wait a second... he's going thermonuclear again on someone over on LS1TECH.com at the moment... something about 5-axis CNC machining centers..."

"whisper...whisper...whisper..."

"Where did we hide what was left of the body of that guy from Car and Driver? How did poSSum get it? Oh no... he's probably bolting it to his hood right now..."



Forgoing all of our fine traditions for the moment relative to dealing on.... err... WITH members of the media, I believe we can extend you the "Provisional Olive Branch of the 5th Gen Forum" and welcome you into our midst on a trial, super-secret, double-dare basis.

It's quite an honor for a journalist, BTW. We shot the last one who ambled by with elastic-launched paper clips until he snapped. He works for "Beautiful Bride Magazine" now.


Keep your eyeballs peeled and you'll find out more here that you would think at first blush...

 

Fair enough.

But will VE be more V-car or more Sigma?

I say more V-car.

 

I don't see why the new GTO wouldn't be built in the same plant as all the new RWD GM cars in 07 (Grand Prix, Camaro, etc...) plus isn't the Holden contract up in 3 years?

 

The next gen GTO, Camaro and maybe another car...will undoubtedly roll down the same assembly line. I'm just not sure what will be under their skin.

Sigma, Sigma Mass, Sigma Lite.......seem to be, literally empty terms, that people throw around to describe anything with a RWD chassis.

I don't know if Holden and GMNA will even consolidate their RWD programs into one?

Holden and GMNA seem to be working together on something...but I don't believe that you can say that one or the other has taken the "lead" on this program.

The questions remain:

1)Is VE more V- car than Sigma?

2) Would GMNA reconfigure plants to build V-cars or will they stick with Sigma?

3) Is VE, and what we'll get here, the same car?

 

Just read your post PacerX. Funniest thing I've read in awhile. Made my morning.

The VE chassis will be more evolutionary than revolutionary when compared to the current V cars. It will not simply be a redone CTS sigma chassis, but a reengineering of Holden's V body. Exactly what "re-engineering" means could be anyone's guess, but there are some very clear clues:

1. The 1997 Holden VT was based on Opel Omega/Cadillac Catera, but was almost entirely Australian engineered and took about 3 years or so to bring to market. The current complete gestation time of a all new car is still about 4 years, so we know the VE is heavily based on an existing car.

2. The VE was initially planned as an Australian car (this was before GM changed direction & decided to use Holden to suppliment our lines here), so we know there isn't large sums of money being spent on development.

3. Most telling: Holden just developed an expensive AWD system based on and engineered to fit the current V car series. This system isn't likly to fit any other vehicle without some expensive modification, and Holden wouldn't invest $125 million for a system they would have to re-engineer again in less than 2 years.

Likely conclusions?

The new VE based RWD cars due out in 2 years or so are more than likely to be pretty much the current V cars that have been modified both for US standards and as improvements to the current car.

The trailing arm rear suspension is likely to be replaced by a variation of Cadillac's Sigma to compete with Falcon's Control Blade rear suspension.

The front struts (which the all new...and relatively cheap.... AWD system is engineered around) is likely to stay.

The floorpan is likely to be slightly altered to accept the revised rear suspension & changed fuel tank location, and there will be a different body.

Because production of the coupe will be 5-10 times what was initially planned to be sold when Monaro was put together, there will be money for a separate coupe structure (instead of basing the whole structure on a 55" tall sedan).

The main reason GM/NA is involved in the process is to have cars sutible for the various divisions and for the US market from the very begining of the design & engineering phase. Though Bob Lutz want's US cars to have separate body styling from Holden's, last word was GM wasn't going to put up the money for this, so beyond nose, tail, & interior, the sedans will almost certainly have similar bodies. The positive side is that the GTO body IS being designed here in the US, so it's possible GTO & Monaro will have different sheetmetal, though they will both have the same proportions, window shapes, etc.

That's the best I can say right now.



http://www.fastlane.com.au/News_Hold...ails050903.htm

 

I don't know if I like the sound of that (neither will Z284ever).

 

... but the AWD components certainly make for some interesting speculation of future possibilities.

... there again is the oppourtunity to differentiate the two top-end V8 models... with RWD vs AWD...

 

Nope! I don't.

What was the purpose of the Insignia concept then? The press release describes this car's chassis, ( and in pretty specific detail), as very Sigma like .....MORE THAN YOU MIGHT REALIZE .

The release goes on to say that this NEW chassis will spawn new RWD cars for GM. That sounded good to me at the time.

Not to take anything away from Holden..I'm very impressed by what they've done with very little money...but I want more for the next Camaro.

Let's face some facts...the F-car has only had 2 basic architectures in it's history.

This next one will probably last a good 20 years .......please lets not skimp. It'll be a loooong time before the next upgrade!

 

I would really like to find out details about Insignia's chassis. Insignia is GM's new global RWD car chassis. I think it would put alot of questions to rest (when you get down to it, we're all really guessing to some degree or another).

As for struts, let's not put a blanket condemnation on them. Doesn't a BMW 3 series use them and the 4th gen use a variation of them as well? Both have stellar reputations as top handling cars over vehicles with more sophisicated front suspensions.

Low cost doesn't always mean low performance. If you want a great deal in your next Camaro, then be ready to pay a great deal for your next Camaro.

 

From the Opel press release:

"Power pack: Rear-wheel drive and V8 engine

Opel’s engineers chose an all-new GM rear-wheel drive architecture being developed for future global products as the basis for the Insignia’s dynamic concept. With double wishbones and coil springs at the front and a five-link axle at the rear (decoupled for refinement), the Insignia delivers exemplary cornering behavior and high directional stability. Hydraulic load-leveling control compensates for changes in payload. In line with the dynamic character, the Insignia is powered by the Corvette’s 344-hp aluminum V8 engine, which gives it a maximum speed of 250 km/h (electronically controlled), with acceleration from zero to 100 km/h in under six seconds. "

If you need more specifics...all I can say right now is.... look under any CTS.



As far as making Camaro more expensive....I think Camaro should have a chassis at least as sophisticated as an $18,000 Mazda6.

No excuses!