camarofan91

What are some pros and cons of platform sharing? How does it affect things like profitability and production costs if at all?

Yossarian14

The main reason sharing common architectures is so important is that it saves a increible amount of money and the millions of dollars saved by automakers ends up lowering price of their vehicles thanks to common assembly lines, supplier contracts, and even parts. Instead of paying millions for developing these individual and unique parts which no one will ever know about they can be produced on a much tighter deadline ahead of the competition. Technology that can be used across various platforms provides greater return on investment, enabling more resources spent on big-ticket items like powertrain engineering. This approach also allows problems to be discovered and resolved quickly, and it necessitates fewer costly, physical prototypes be constructed. If one vehicle has a problem such as one in the suspension it will be across the board in their lineup which is both good and bad.

This can be seen when the Oldsmobile Bravada became the Buick Rainier, and the GMC Envoy is sold also as an Isuzu Ascender. Brands are trying to create distinctive identities in an increasingly crowded marketplace which is getting harder and harder to do with these vehicles. It's like a Camaro/Firebird comparison. Looking at the two vehicles you can easily see the pros and cons of platform-sharing. The H2 is derived from the GMT-800 platform, allowing Hummer engineers to tap into a large quantity of existing parts to fit their needs. The front end of the frame was spun off from the 2500 Series SUVs (3/4-ton Suburban and Yukon XL), while the rear portion was borrowed from the 1500 Series (Tahoe and Yukon) for its five-link suspension components.

Buick Rainier
Chevrolet TrailBlazer, TrailBlazer EXT
GMC Envoy, Envoy XL, Envoy XUV
Isuzu Ascender
Saab 9-7x

Cadillac Escalade/Escalade ESV
Cadillac Escalade EXT
Chevrolet Avalanche
Chevrolet Silverado, HD, hybrid
Chevrolet Suburban
Chevrolet Tahoe
GMC Sierra, HD, hybrid
GMC Yukon Denali, Yukon Denali XL
GMC Yukon, Yukon XL
Hummer H2

Chevrolet Colorado
GMC Canyon
Hummer H3

Chevrolet Uplander
Buick Rendezvous
Buick Terraza
Pontiac Aztek
Pontiac Montana SV6
Saturn Relay
Chrysler Pacifica
Chrysler Town & Country
Dodge Caravan

Ford Escape
Mazda Tribute
Mercury Mariner

Porsche Cayenne
Volkswagen Touareg Nissan Armada
Nissan Frontier
Nissan Pathfinder
Nissan Titan
Nissan Xterra
Infiniti QX56

NewbieWar

it allows GM to have more trys at the same person, If you dont like the Tahoe, What about this very stylish Escalde?

If you dont like the Trans Am perhaps you like it a bit simpler, try a Camaro.

although Gm sometimes forgets that its Another try car, instead of another Company car. Sometimes the "Another Try" car just wasnt distingushed enough from the first car and GM becomes looking as plain and "BLA" "BLA" "BLA"... sometimes the Boneville and the LaSabre look too much the same, or something and the "OLDNESS" of Buick leaked over to pontiac and tarnished the Pontiac Brand. Sometimes the unrefined Impala blead over to Pontiac to make the Grand Prix, and then Pontiac is just as plain as Chevy... in order to make the "Another try" car worth while and the Rebadging, platform sharing, they must be distinctly different, and defined with the company.

camarofan91

If it lowers prices and costs all around i dont see why they shouldent build a firebird with the future camaro exept the "we are the american bmw" attitude pontiac now has, which imo will never happen. Leave that to cadillac or buick.

Thanks

NewbieWar

everything except marketing... when you have to advertise twice for the same model, its kinda self defeating... but when you build a car for entusiasts marketing is taken care of by the product...

FutureZMan

In the end all platform sharing allows is as stated above, more shots at getting it right.

I for one dont mind, I do take the 05' suburban and a 05' Escalade in there own context. Even tho' a fully loaded suburban is a cadaliac, hell its a luxary house on wheels.

guionM

Not just marketing.

The slightest variation in design means more stampings and cosmetic parts (inc interiors). Then there's different service networks (Safe to say you won't see many Escalades in Chevy repair departments) and other items.

Having fewer divisions making the same thing may mean less volume of sales, but it also means more profit on what you do sell. That's why Ford and Chrysler can afford to spend money on things like a low production Viper & GT and actually break even, or create unique engine block castings for Cobra Mustangs. Meanwhile, GM can't afford to make a Cadillac Cien, and relies on sheer purchase volume to compensate. Not that it's bad, but it still a tradeoff.



Camarofan91, you question was on platform sharing and multiple divisions selling the same model isn't platform sharing. Here's some examples of platform sharing:

*Dodge Neon & Chrysler PT Cruiser.
*Cadillac Deville and the Pontiac Bonneville.
*Lincoln LS and Jaguar S-type (and in modified form, Thunderbird)
*Chevrolet Cobalt and the Chevrolet HHR
*Ford Mondeo (formerly the Countour & Mystique in the US) and the Jaguar X-type
*BMW's 7 series, and (in highly modified fourm) the Maybach
*Infinity's G35 (called the Skyline in Japan) & the Nissan 350Z
*Chevrolet's Corvette & Cadillac's XLR

The list goes on and on.

Platform sharing is the norm in the auto industry. A car either has to sell in simply insane numbers, or the chassis has to be around forever and ever, or it has to be shared with other models to make a profit today.

The C6 is based on the C5 Vette.

The 4th gen Camaro was based on the 3rd gen Camaro, which used the Chevy Monza as a jump off point, which was based on the Chevy Vega, which came out in 1970 and whose engineering was likely initiated in the mid-1960s (why it cracks me up when some demand that Camaro should be and always was a world class, expense & complexity-be-damned, leading edge automobile. ).

camarofan91

ok got ya

thanks

Big Als Z

*BMW's 7 series, and (in highly modified fourm) the Maybach

I belive you mean MB's S class and Maybach since Maybach is owned by MB.

Platform sharring is great. Most Asian manufactures makes tons off this process. GM needs to learn how to make more flexable chassis.

A good example is the Sigma chassis. It underpins a RWD CTS, but stretch it out, and you have an STS. Add more hight, and you have SRX SUV. You can add AWD and multiple engine options from a 2.8 V6 to a 5.7/6.0 V8 to a 4.4 SC Northstar and 5 and 6spd autos and 6spd manual transmissoins.

Another good example is Nissan/Infinity's FM chassis.

Now what has been described above is Badge Engineering. When changing the bare esentials to change a car from one company to the next. GM is great with this, and can be seen with the likes of thier trucks and SUV's.

Id like to see GM more chassis flexable, like Epsilon be able to take over Theta and W body.

FutureZMan

Not eveything ends up being what it initially was, this has been proven time and time again.

No one cares the camaro was bread from Vega, they care what it became and in its demise it was a world class, Leading edge vehicle for its price.

thats all that matters, and its an unchangeable fact.

I know all to well about the "Dark times" of the Chevy camaro, and its heritage. I also know all to well the dark times of the corvette, cars like people evolve into what they where truly intended to be. The corvette wasnt even worth uttering its name 20-25 years ago, but i doubt corvette enthusiasts re-hash that whenever heritage is brought up.

guionM

You're right.

My mind was elsewhere yesterday.... GM's piece of sh*t clutch gave out on my Camaro early that morning, and ruined my entire night out.

$160K miles. 3rd clutch. Same problem. Ripped in half. This never happened in Fords I owned with the same mileage.

Point isn't that the basis for the 4th gen's chassis can be traced back almost 40 years ago. If there was ever a chassis on the planet that evolved to perform to impressive capabilities, it's the 4th gen f-body.

Point is that first, platform sharing or evolution is the only way to make money on cars at prices we can afford today, and 2nd, When people talk of a world class chassis (meaning sophisticated and unique to the f-body), they aren't talking about an f-body, but some foreign car. The Camaro is about taking the least expensive route and performing as well or better than the other guys that make a more expensive chassis..... and charge you for it.

MarineReconZ28

Ford has the perfect solution for longevity of tranny components... Low HP and TQ numbers...

guionM

Yeah yeah, joke, joke.

But seriously, I'm pretty irritated at this. Consider:
Camaro Z28 LT1: 325 ft/lbs torque with 3400 pound car
Thunderbird SC: 330 ft/lbs torque with 3800 pound car
93 police Mustang: 300 ft/lbs with a 3200 pound car.



Current SC clutch was changed at 145,000 miles (1st time). I now have 210K and it's still strong!

My '85 Police Mustang's clutch was never replaced the whole time I owned it (from 65K to 225K miles). The 93 Stang I ran from 83K to 140K, same story.

My Z28 clutch was new when I got it at 40,000 miles, it ripped on me around 85,000, and it ripped again at 160K.

Seems most Z28 drivers rarely get more than 50K miles from the stock clutch. I haven't heard similar issues out of Corvette drivers, so it seems GM's cost cutting "good enough" mentality is to blame.

I just hope that mentality went out the window with the new management.

FutureZMan

for once i wont argue

I agree whole-heartidly.

NewbieWar

how many corvette owners drive like us f-body owners?

so why would their clutch go out as often?

and I drove a 04 mustang v6 the other day, and i can tell you, that clutch sucked... it'll probably last another million miles, but it sucked!