Rear Wheel Drive Buicks on the Table, but not yet Approved
#1
Rear Wheel Drive Buicks on the Table, but not yet Approved
So much for Edmunds' credibility...
more
Alpha based Buick's aren't a go yet, and may depend on a Chevy counterpart.
GM Inside News Forum
December 3, 2012
By: Nick Saporito
Late last week speculation surrounding the potential of rear-wheel drive Buicks was reignited. In a report from Edmunds, it is asserted that General Motors is going to launch a Buick based on the rear drive Alpha platform that currently underpins the Cadillac ATS. While performance Buick's are currently under consideration, final approval may hinge on a sister car for Chevrolet, one similar to the Code130R concept car.
In recent months GM has been renewing trademarks for legendary Buick nameplates, such as the Grand National and GNX. It isn't uncommon for manufactures to hang on to historical names just in case, but the timing does appear to be peculiar considering other speculation surrounding rear drive Buick products.
GM Inside News Forum
December 3, 2012
By: Nick Saporito
Late last week speculation surrounding the potential of rear-wheel drive Buicks was reignited. In a report from Edmunds, it is asserted that General Motors is going to launch a Buick based on the rear drive Alpha platform that currently underpins the Cadillac ATS. While performance Buick's are currently under consideration, final approval may hinge on a sister car for Chevrolet, one similar to the Code130R concept car.
In recent months GM has been renewing trademarks for legendary Buick nameplates, such as the Grand National and GNX. It isn't uncommon for manufactures to hang on to historical names just in case, but the timing does appear to be peculiar considering other speculation surrounding rear drive Buick products.
#2
Re: Rear Wheel Drive Buicks on the Table, but not yet Approved
Alpha is going to be a global RWD platform, how does GM not step all over itself with offerings from Cadillac, Buick and Chevrolet, especially in the U.S. market?
Cadillac will have ATS sedan and coupe on Alpha and CTS sedan and coupe on Alpha+.
Chevrolet will have the 6th Gen Camaro on Alpha+.
I have a harder time placing the Buick in the lineup for U.S. than the C130RS as a sub Camaro entry coupe. How do you differentiate between Cadillac and Buick Alphas? Buick sedans could take sales from Cadillac. Coupes could take away from Cadillac’s or Camaro.
Do you make it a 2 seater luxury coupe or roadster even?
Cadillac will have ATS sedan and coupe on Alpha and CTS sedan and coupe on Alpha+.
Chevrolet will have the 6th Gen Camaro on Alpha+.
I have a harder time placing the Buick in the lineup for U.S. than the C130RS as a sub Camaro entry coupe. How do you differentiate between Cadillac and Buick Alphas? Buick sedans could take sales from Cadillac. Coupes could take away from Cadillac’s or Camaro.
Do you make it a 2 seater luxury coupe or roadster even?
#3
Re: Rear Wheel Drive Buicks on the Table, but not yet Approved
I tend to agree, while the idea of an Alpha Buick performance sedan sounds good to enthusiasts, I think most Buick enthusiasts moved over to Pontiac years ago, and now those that have stayed with GM are either in the Cadillac or Chevrolet camps.
A Buick halo coupe or roadster might work, but not before we see multiple offerings for both Cadillac and Chevrolet. I figure we'll see the Alpha+ Camaro, before the next CTS (or around the same time-frame) and then the Alpha Chevrolets.
I still want to see a mini-El Camino-type vehicle based on Alpha.
A Buick halo coupe or roadster might work, but not before we see multiple offerings for both Cadillac and Chevrolet. I figure we'll see the Alpha+ Camaro, before the next CTS (or around the same time-frame) and then the Alpha Chevrolets.
I still want to see a mini-El Camino-type vehicle based on Alpha.
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Fairfax Station, VA. Formally Long Island :(
Posts: 1,398
Re: Rear Wheel Drive Buicks on the Table, but not yet Approved
Maybe the Regal GS will be done the right way this go around. It has 270 HP out of a turbo 4, but it's FWD and the performance numbers are crappy. I know GM has other names they are throwing around, but a Regal GS with a TT V6 at 350 HP with RWD would be pretty nice. I considered buying a Regal GS when shopping for my Mustang. The inside is so nice as well as the outside. The powertrain is a letdown.
#7
Re: Rear Wheel Drive Buicks on the Table, but not yet Approved
It will be curious to see if GM delivers on this latest promise of RWD, or if it derails, as happened with Zeta; I suppose pending bankruptcy loomed large over the former though, but still.
#8
Re: Rear Wheel Drive Buicks on the Table, but not yet Approved
This was one of my favorite Buick concepts from a few years ago. I'd love to see something like this make it to production. Buick Velite
I think its a huge mistake that Cadillac doesn't have some sort of convertible or convertible hard top in its line up. CTS or ATS would be great.
I think its a huge mistake that Cadillac doesn't have some sort of convertible or convertible hard top in its line up. CTS or ATS would be great.
#10
Re: Rear Wheel Drive Buicks on the Table, but not yet Approved
There is almost certainly work going on at GM to expand the Alpha platform. I got to talk to a couple of people from GM during press days, and while neither could talk about particular cars, nor could they answer actual questions about things like this, there's ways to ask to get a good feel for what's happening.
I brought up the idea the fact that many young people out here are gobbling up used BMW 3 series out here, and that if (say) something like the 130 were made and priced about where a lightly used 3 series would run, there would be quite a potential boom in winning over young buyers, then I watched for a reaction. You could see that the person I was speaking to caught themself before letting something slip, and when they agreed you could tell they wanted to say more about it.
My feel based on the Auto Show and other things, is that we'll see something of the 130 by later this decade. Here's how I see it.
First, GM has to create a lower price version of the Alpha platform. It's one thing to create a lightweight sporty platform for a car that's going to sell mostly in the upper 30K to low 40K range. But it's a different story when you gotta sell that chassis for about 10 grand less. Cadillac's Alpha has plenty of tricks and materials that you can't put into a low cost, high volume car without either losing money or having margins so thin you have to sell hundreds of thousands of them to break even. GM is well into taking cost out now, but don't expect the result to be priced next to Cruzes or even low end Malibus.
Second, GM has higher priority cars that the chassis has to go under. The next CTS is first (over a larger version of Alpha). But I'd expect the first lower cost version to go to Chevrolet for the next Impala with Buick getting a version at about the same time (both larger versions).
It's once resources are freed up after this when i'd think we'd see a production spinoff of the 130, either as the next Camaro or as a stand alone addition to Chevrolet's lineup. That would put it around the 2016/2017MY (2015/2016 calendar). That's 25 to 37 months from now, which given development times and the secrecy now apparent seems about right (it took about 33 months for the Challenger and 39 months for Camaro to get from concept showing to a production line).
I brought up the idea the fact that many young people out here are gobbling up used BMW 3 series out here, and that if (say) something like the 130 were made and priced about where a lightly used 3 series would run, there would be quite a potential boom in winning over young buyers, then I watched for a reaction. You could see that the person I was speaking to caught themself before letting something slip, and when they agreed you could tell they wanted to say more about it.
My feel based on the Auto Show and other things, is that we'll see something of the 130 by later this decade. Here's how I see it.
First, GM has to create a lower price version of the Alpha platform. It's one thing to create a lightweight sporty platform for a car that's going to sell mostly in the upper 30K to low 40K range. But it's a different story when you gotta sell that chassis for about 10 grand less. Cadillac's Alpha has plenty of tricks and materials that you can't put into a low cost, high volume car without either losing money or having margins so thin you have to sell hundreds of thousands of them to break even. GM is well into taking cost out now, but don't expect the result to be priced next to Cruzes or even low end Malibus.
Second, GM has higher priority cars that the chassis has to go under. The next CTS is first (over a larger version of Alpha). But I'd expect the first lower cost version to go to Chevrolet for the next Impala with Buick getting a version at about the same time (both larger versions).
It's once resources are freed up after this when i'd think we'd see a production spinoff of the 130, either as the next Camaro or as a stand alone addition to Chevrolet's lineup. That would put it around the 2016/2017MY (2015/2016 calendar). That's 25 to 37 months from now, which given development times and the secrecy now apparent seems about right (it took about 33 months for the Challenger and 39 months for Camaro to get from concept showing to a production line).
#11
Re: Rear Wheel Drive Buicks on the Table, but not yet Approved
My feel based on the Auto Show and other things, is that we'll see something of the 130 by later this decade. Here's how I see it.
First, GM has to create a lower price version of the Alpha platform. It's one thing to create a lightweight sporty platform for a car that's going to sell mostly in the upper 30K to low 40K range. But it's a different story when you gotta sell that chassis for about 10 grand less. Cadillac's Alpha has plenty of tricks and materials that you can't put into a low cost, high volume car without either losing money or having margins so thin you have to sell hundreds of thousands of them to break even. GM is well into taking cost out now, but don't expect the result to be priced next to Cruzes or even low end Malibus.
Second, GM has higher priority cars that the chassis has to go under. The next CTS is first (over a larger version of Alpha). But I'd expect the first lower cost version to go to Chevrolet for the next Impala with Buick getting a version at about the same time (both larger versions).
It's once resources are freed up after this when i'd think we'd see a production spinoff of the 130, either as the next Camaro or as a standalone addition to Chevrolet's lineup. That would put it around the 2016/2017MY (2015/2016 calendar). That's 25 to 37 months from now, which given development times and the secrecy now apparent seems about right (it took about 33 months for the Challenger and 39 months for Camaro to get from concept showing to a production line).
First, GM has to create a lower price version of the Alpha platform. It's one thing to create a lightweight sporty platform for a car that's going to sell mostly in the upper 30K to low 40K range. But it's a different story when you gotta sell that chassis for about 10 grand less. Cadillac's Alpha has plenty of tricks and materials that you can't put into a low cost, high volume car without either losing money or having margins so thin you have to sell hundreds of thousands of them to break even. GM is well into taking cost out now, but don't expect the result to be priced next to Cruzes or even low end Malibus.
Second, GM has higher priority cars that the chassis has to go under. The next CTS is first (over a larger version of Alpha). But I'd expect the first lower cost version to go to Chevrolet for the next Impala with Buick getting a version at about the same time (both larger versions).
It's once resources are freed up after this when i'd think we'd see a production spinoff of the 130, either as the next Camaro or as a standalone addition to Chevrolet's lineup. That would put it around the 2016/2017MY (2015/2016 calendar). That's 25 to 37 months from now, which given development times and the secrecy now apparent seems about right (it took about 33 months for the Challenger and 39 months for Camaro to get from concept showing to a production line).
#12
Re: Rear Wheel Drive Buicks on the Table, but not yet Approved
The actual trick pieces are things like: Magnesium motor mounts, aluminum hood, and natural fiber in place of plastic in some areas. But the size of the car and 4 cylinder power means that the differential doesn't have to be so heavy and the rear half-shafts can be much lighter. The radiator can be smaller and lightweight. The brake rotors can be thinner because it isn't going to have to stop as much weight to get the same performance, etc...
The next CTS will benefit from the lighter structure, but the moment you start hanging a V8 on in the chassis, and everything it needs, you'll see a substantial increase in weight.
I believe the Camaro will be lighter in this chassis. BUT Camaro's going to have to shrink...a lot... to take advantage of it.
The V6 Camaro is about 340 pounds heavier than the much smaller V6 ATS. I would wager that if the next Camaro stays the same size as the current one (which is also roughly the same size as the current Mustang...it's massiveness is an illusion) I'd peg the weight loss at half that, or about 170-200 pounds across the board.
Shrink Camaro to ATS size (roughly the 130 concept), and you're into a whole new ballgame.
#13
Re: Rear Wheel Drive Buicks on the Table, but not yet Approved
I believe the Camaro will be lighter in this chassis. BUT Camaro's going to have to shrink...a lot... to take advantage of it.
The V6 Camaro is about 340 pounds heavier than the much smaller V6 ATS. I would wager that if the next Camaro stays the same size as the current one (which is also roughly the same size as the current Mustang...it's massiveness is an illusion) I'd peg the weight loss at half that, or about 170-200 pounds across the board.
Shrink Camaro to ATS size (roughly the 130 concept), and you're into a whole new ballgame.
I just hope GM isn't chasing a moving target if the next Mustang gets slightly smaller and lighter as well. Some of that may depend on if it gets the expected IRS.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
dbusch22
Forced Induction
6
10-31-2016 11:09 AM
squarehead
General 1967-2002 F-Body Tech
0
11-21-2014 08:02 PM
guionM
Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion
14
06-19-2002 08:30 AM