GM to KILL future RWD Cars!
04-10-2007, 06:07 PM
#41
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Arizona
Age: 43
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by fsttyms1
But with all the safety features that are required and all the structural requirements and all the other features that people are demanding its not that easy. Same with this mileage issue that is in debate. Many think its as easy as just doing it but its not. GM makes some of the best mileage V6s and V8s out there (hell my neighbor at my cottage routinely gets over 30mpg from his C6 on the hwy)
I agree with you. I was simply pissed at everyone slamming GM engineering saying it's shoddy when it really isn't.
As to the comment about GM not wanting to do more R&D, keep in mind R&D costs get passed along to the consumer and considering GM just got done dumping millions upon millions into the Zeta platform while trying to keep vehicles at a target price then having this dumped on them it will make life for them difficult. It's not like GM consumers are ready to absorb all that price increase. They'll go to Hyundai. GM is a tanker, they can't just change their corporate strategy on a dime.
04-10-2007, 07:12 PM
#42
teh Senior Instigator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Huntington Beach, CA -> Ashburn, VA -> Raleigh, NC -> Walnut Creek, CA
Age: 42
Posts: 44,090
Received 957 Likes
on
328 Posts
Originally Posted by aesir11
Have you seen the nickel plant that produces the battery for the Prius?
FYI, that picture was bullshit. that damage was from things they produced many years ago.
04-11-2007, 08:14 AM
#44
Safety Car
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 4,411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This news really concerns me. RWD cars are very import to some of GM's NA brands, and this new wrinkle must be corrected. Buick just released it's new Park Avenue flaship for the Chinese market, where the Marque has all of the luxury luster and prestige they once had here. This car is the size of the LS460/S/7/A8, and looks to be a viable competitor to them. The interior is goregous, and true luxury. The exterior wasn't change alot from the Holden Statesman from which it was based, but it's okay because there aren't any other versions in that market, making it totally unique to the Chinese consumer. This is a car that needs to come here and slot above the Lucerne; now, who knows? Again, this IS NOT a concept; it's a production Buick that just debuted in China. 
04-11-2007, 11:02 AM
#45
Pro
In China, GM has done well earlier this decade and the Buick brand is attracting many young buyers (quite contrary to the situation in the U.S.) - that goes to show you it's not bad to start with a clean sheet at new place. (VW has been in China for decades and many taxis are based on VW cars, hence the image of the brand there isn't quite nice as in the U.S.)
Now the competition there is really fierce, Hyundai is making a killing, and local manufacturers make very affordable cars. Still, for GM the prospects looks better. I guess you really have to blame the contracts with the unions.
Now the competition there is really fierce, Hyundai is making a killing, and local manufacturers make very affordable cars. Still, for GM the prospects looks better. I guess you really have to blame the contracts with the unions.
04-11-2007, 12:15 PM
#47
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Arizona
Age: 43
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is a damn nice buick.
CLpower, I'll retract my statement about the Nickel plant then, I didn't look it up to verify ... most of the bullshit threads on here are called out pretty quickly by the members so I assumed it was true. With that said, the Prius still isn't as green as it boasts and as I mentioned before it still not what the majority of the American public and especially not the enthusiasts are looking for...
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...mileage_1.html
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news0...idwatch01.html
So if a car like the Prius, light underpowered, boring, can barely hit the 34 mpg driving what chance does a car that we actually want to drive have. So I still stand by my comment that if I was Lutz, I would be pissed too.
CLpower, I'll retract my statement about the Nickel plant then, I didn't look it up to verify ... most of the bullshit threads on here are called out pretty quickly by the members so I assumed it was true. With that said, the Prius still isn't as green as it boasts and as I mentioned before it still not what the majority of the American public and especially not the enthusiasts are looking for...
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...mileage_1.html
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news0...idwatch01.html
So if a car like the Prius, light underpowered, boring, can barely hit the 34 mpg driving what chance does a car that we actually want to drive have. So I still stand by my comment that if I was Lutz, I would be pissed too.
04-11-2007, 01:39 PM
#48
Moderator
Regional Coordinator (Southeast)
Regional Coordinator (Southeast)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Mooresville, NC
Age: 37
Posts: 43,475
Received 3,662 Likes
on
2,495 Posts
Damn first build I would actually ever drive.
04-12-2007, 03:10 PM
#51
Originally Posted by aesir11
So does this CAFE standard not apply to imports... I mean seriously, there's no way Benz is any where near 27 mpg right now considering the most fuel efficient car in its line the C230 only get 19 mpg city and 25 highway....
Wait wait... the SLK280 roadster gets City 20 mpg and 27 highway and well all know there are millions of those rolling around to compensate for every E class getting 18 mpg.
Wait wait... the SLK280 roadster gets City 20 mpg and 27 highway and well all know there are millions of those rolling around to compensate for every E class getting 18 mpg.
My E350 does 25/30+
04-12-2007, 05:45 PM
#52
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Arizona
Age: 43
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever man, I'm just quoting the figures. Look it up online. Besides the government doesn't give a rats ass about the numbers one person in the whole country was able to obtain. They care about what is posted on the window sticker.
04-13-2007, 05:47 PM
#54
how handsome I am
Originally Posted by CLpower
thank GOD.
04-14-2007, 06:53 PM
#57
Senior Moderator
I wonder if, seeing this, Honda will decide not to make the next RL RWD. 
At least the G8 is safe, that car will be badass from the enthusiast's standpoint.
At least the G8 is safe, that car will be badass from the enthusiast's standpoint.
04-15-2007, 10:10 AM
#59
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by neuronbob
I wonder if, seeing this, Honda will decide not to make the next RL RWD.
If you put the same motor in 2 cars that weigh the same and the only difference is that one is FWD and the other is RWD I would think both should get about the same gas mileage...
Only difference I can see if that the driveshaft on a RWD car is longer and maybe there are more losses in a RWD rear end
Doesn't seem to me that it would make that much of a difference...
"Trouble is that rear-wheel-drive cars are bigger, heavier and thirstier than front-wheel-drive vehicles."
So don't make 'em bigger, heavier and thirstier... There's nothing wrong with the fuel economy of the S2K and it's RWD.
04-15-2007, 11:21 AM
#60
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Age: 43
Posts: 5,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GreenMonster
I'm still trying to figure out how having a FWD car vs. a RWD car affects gas mileage...
If you put the same motor in 2 cars that weigh the same and the only difference is that one is FWD and the other is RWD I would think both should get about the same gas mileage...
Only difference I can see if that the driveshaft on a RWD car is longer and maybe there are more losses in a RWD rear end
Doesn't seem to me that it would make that much of a difference...
"Trouble is that rear-wheel-drive cars are bigger, heavier and thirstier than front-wheel-drive vehicles."
So don't make 'em bigger, heavier and thirstier... There's nothing wrong with the fuel economy of the S2K and it's RWD.
If you put the same motor in 2 cars that weigh the same and the only difference is that one is FWD and the other is RWD I would think both should get about the same gas mileage...
Only difference I can see if that the driveshaft on a RWD car is longer and maybe there are more losses in a RWD rear end
Doesn't seem to me that it would make that much of a difference...
"Trouble is that rear-wheel-drive cars are bigger, heavier and thirstier than front-wheel-drive vehicles."
So don't make 'em bigger, heavier and thirstier... There's nothing wrong with the fuel economy of the S2K and it's RWD.
Now if he is talking about packaging then I understand what he is saying. Like you mentioned, FWD packaging is more efficient and could lead to a smaller/lighter car.
04-16-2007, 10:12 AM
#61
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SA, TX
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not GMs fault. As usual the gov mandated CAFEs are interferring with the free market.....first we cannot drill where we need to and then they force feed us CAFE driven cars nobody wants....please no oil companies hold the secrets to high mileage cars comments....at least the H/A fwd cars are a pretty good ride for fwd....
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
