You tell him you want a Solstice based new camaro so that I can see him explode in laughter

 

The new Mustang will be built on the most high tech, advanced chassis that Ford has to offer, the Lincoln LS platform.

I would hate to see GM use a bastardized platform that is the Solstice. I want GM to use the most high tech platform they have to offer, Sigma or the Vcar-Sigma mix we hear about.

I can't imagine the handling capabilities of the Solstice with a v8 inside of it. It would be like driving a pickup truck.

Anyone remember how there is going to be the low cost RWD stucture here in a few years in the United States with elements of the V car in it?

Start thinking long term. Not in the short term news stories we get here.

 

If he were Rick Wagoner, Bob Lutz, Kurt Ritter, or even Gary Cowger then he'd be in the position to.

(Didn't he explode with laughter when I said Monaro was being imported to the US almost a year ago?)

 

Yes, but he was in the middle of the studies that said that GM could not bring Holden here...and under the GM politics of the day it was not. Now with Lutz freespending like he is anything is possible.

As far as a new Camaro, though there may not be an offcial program..it is being worked on...if anyone knows where the Camaro name plate is going, it is RP. That being said every indication I have ever been given is that we wont see a Solstice based Camaro..

Also I predicted the GTO first, so take that

 

LS1 is jammed in because of the design of the car, not the engine. As engines go, it's pretty small. Meanwhile, Ford is easily shoehorning 4.6L DOHC engines that are larger than 460 big blocks into much smaller Mustangs.

 

How many times do you really need to say this? On top of that, I saw LOTS of people predicting it before you when that retro-flavored GTO concept came out years ago , if you want to get technical.

Do you think they'd even bother with a GTO concept if they weren't looking into reviving the nameplate YEARS ago?!

Seriously, dude, the constant ringing of your own bell get old...

 

"You tell him you want a Solstice based new camaro so that I can see him explode in laughter."

K - I'll start a new thread with that as the idea.

 

I was thinking about why Gm would use a t-56 with such low powered motor as the supercharged ecotec. After a little pondering I came up with this. What if GM is wanting to use the C5's rear transaxle with the t-56 and IRS in the new solstice, begal, and sky. That would allow them to save R&D cost as well as use a great rear end. Now if they are doing that what else from the C5 might we see?

Also does anyone have any pics of the begal that I can see. The link earlier in the thread didn't work.

Oh yeah I think I got a better name than begal, how about GN!

 

Lutz freespending? Actually Mr Lutz is shaking up that 'we can't do that' culture at GM.

It's funny how those studies said they couldn't bring Holden here. I spent more than a year on this site (starting in 1998!) saying those excuses GM were comming up with for not bringing Holdens here were , how car magazine after car magazine said GM's excuses for not bringing Holden over were ridiculous, how Scott basically said the whole car wasn't worth it, and a few other (nameless people) echoed this without even looking into this. Then Bob Lutz comes along, cut's through the territorial BS that prevented an honest look at importing Holdens to the US, & suddenly, not only is Holden exporting to the US, they are also engineering the RWD chassis that will soon be under new RWD cars here. That's NOT freespending, that's a miracle!

I don't know anything about what's going on with Camaro beyond a likely sell by date, and I won't pretend to. But keep in mind, Solstice isn't an existing floorpan. It's being developed as we speak. GM has only one set of RWD components system engineered (other than Corvette), and that's the sigma set of components. Camaro & Solstice will most likely have them as well. Being that low cost concerns are driving Solstice's chassis development, Camaro being a part of that is nearly a no cost proposition. If Camaro's floorpan development piggybacks off Solstice or not, it will most certainly still share Solstice's components.

Therefore, Camaro & Solstice will share. If we say it's "based on Solstice" or not is a matter of preference.

 

Just to add, a quick question. Someone on another thread mentioned McPhearson strut front suspension. Assuming that GM won't spring for a new suspension up front for the Solstice to keep costs down, is there any rear drive car in the world(FWD strut pieces would be completly different) that GM would raid for the pieces?

 

<bully from simpsons voice>HA-HA!</bully from simpsons voice>

 

I don't think I'd mind front struts so much if the car had an IRS.

 

This is one area I'm completely dumb in.

I know there is a preference here for a variation of SLA or control arms over McPhearsons. I know that to make McPhersons work, the upper strut towers normally need to be braced to prevent distortion that would effect handling (something I learned from my Mustangs). Beyond this, is there any true difference in handling between the 2?

I believe the 3rd gen 's front suspension was struts, and it did wonders in handling.

 

A MacPherson strut's (named after the Chevy engineer who designed it), leading attribute is that it is cheap. Maybe we can get someone with some chassis expertise to go into greater detail but......essentially they create alot of deflection, and potentially poor control.

The 3rd gens had them. They got them to handle well by adding huge tires (for the time), and greatly limiting wheel travel.

 

The McPhearson strut setup's main advantage, as mentioned above, is it's price. They generally don't have very good road feel or the ride quality of the more sophisticated SLA configuration.

The biggest exception to this guidline is BMW, noone seems to have told them that struts are bad. I think we have all heard about thier handeling prowess, so maybe its the details that count after all.........