67 LS-1 & T-56

Thought about this today while looking at Camaro sales stats.

Has the Camaro program alone been enough to cover the costs of Zeta, and maybe even turn a profit?

If so how has this influenced future product decisions at GM, and the perception of "specialty" and performance cars?


My gut tells me that GM is probably amazed at how well these cars have sold.

ImportedRoomate

So much so that the ZL1 is on its way...

67 LS-1 & T-56

Good point. Not to mention several other revenue generating special editions.

Melee Penguin

Hopefully it pays for a smaller platform that younger enthusiasts want to purchase instead of a bloated "Camaro" that performs the same as cars from 98-02

formula79

Too bad they cancelled the N/A made RWD sedans. If their design was as powerful they also could have sold well. Buick still badly needs a nice RWD sedan IMO.

ImportedRoomate

I'm fine with the direction Buick is going as a premium FWD brand. Goes up well against Acura. Cadillac needs to go all RWD.

Z28x

I agree with this. It separates Buick from Cadillac nicely.

bossco

Early sales targets might tell you a bit about that compared to the life for the chassis.

If GM had some modest sales predictions combined with a brief cycle life for the chassis then big sales numbers would point toward profitability.

The current Mustang blew Ford's sales predictions out of the water early on so they were able freshen things up a bit with a the revised body, interior, and chassis.

Had the Mustang been a dismal in sales the extent of the changes would have probably been incremental.

OutsiderIROC-Z

guionM

Zeta was developed by Holden to be very profitable with sales solely from Australia, the Middle East, and New Zealand... areas in which Holden was already selling vehicles.

The Zeta program was relatively cheap. Zeta cost about 1 billion dollars. A typical "ground up" new car program can easily run 3 to 4 billion.

The large Zeta sedans cost an additional AUS$250mil to develop. More remarkable considering that's roughly what converting the 4th gen to accept the LS1 and the front end redesign cost. But the large Zeta needed to be done cheaply. Cars the size of the Statesman and Caprice sell only a few hundred per month in Australia. Large Zetas are dependent on exports and being made elsewhere to make creating them cost effective.

Like the Statesman, the Camaro spinoff was also done relatively cheaply.
For Camaro to see the light of day it needed to be set up to be profitable or at least break even at relatively low production numbers.... as well as to be killed without any real financial loss. It's easy to forget that Camaro's success was by no means certain. The coupe market goes through cycles of boom and bust and the combined sales of all coupes has been relatively stagnant for years. And as numerous vehicles have proven, something that generates excitement at car shows doesn't always do well in showrooms (see: SSR)


If you are looking for a vehicle that's doing something towards amorphing some part of Holden's Zeta development expense, it's the Caprice PPV. Like the GTO, it's beefing up Statesman's production volume many times over
what was planned and spreading out cost of creating the large Zeta.

The basic Zeta chassis itself (which is the Holden Commodore) is set up to be profitable over it's lifetime in the Australian market. It's spinoffs simply have to recoupe the investment it took to create them.

In the case of the large sedans and the Camaro, the threshold is relatively low.

That's related to what my understanding of the issue GM was having with an Alpha based Camaro idea a while back. Zeta is a very cheap chassis to base Camaro on, while Alpha was a bit more costly. Camaro can be made at low volumes on the current Zeta profitable if things tank, while higher volume or higher prices would be needed on Alpha unless subtantial costs could come out. Then the issue of after altering the Alpha, is there any real benefit over the cheaper alternative of taking weight out of the current Camaro structure.

I'm sure there are still a few people amazed that Camaro has been this successful. However, it's my belief that the people most amazed are the same people who weren't wishing the Camaro well, at best.

jg95z28

Which leads to a good point. When all is said and done, tweaking Alpha to fit Camaro may not actually save all the size and weight that everyone is concerned about and in the end, more than likely raise the base price considerably. Whereas refining the current architecture to save excess weight is probably cheaper and won't alienate current buyers who actually like the car they already have.

As they say, if it ain't broke...