Posted on 11/27/2005 10:50:14 PM PST by truth_seeker
The exterior styling was done by the same idiots who penned the last Grand Am and Grand Prix here in America. On the other hand, it's perfectly in keeping with the GTO tradition - you couldn't tell the first year GTOs apart from the Pontiac Tempests (the Grand Am of the time) except for the badging.
That said, they need to fire the exterior stylist, instead of letting him pen the Cobalt, the G6, etc., etc.
Many of your points are quite valid, but criticizing them for sticking with pushrod technology is not fair, I think. Their engines are fine...look at the LS7. Pushrod engine. Also, DCX is also using pushrod engines (like the Hemis), and doing quite well with them.
Meanwhile, Ford, which has OHC engines, is most behind the curve on power.
Better handling on dry surfaces. No torque steer. Better traction on inclines. Better overall weight balance.
(This isn't an exhaustive discussion of the merits of the two systems - it's a simplified overview, couched in generalities. I'm also not discussing AWD vs. RWD.)
RWD is better for performance, longevity, and handling.
1. When you hit the accelerator on a car, the nose comes up and the tail goes down because the effective center of gravity has shifted rearwards. This is known as "weight transfer". In effect, it reduces the pressure on the front wheels (which reduces traction) and increases the pressure on the rear wheels (increasing traction). A car that uses the rear wheels to move itself, therefore, will accelerate faster than an identical car with front wheel drive. The downside is that a RWD car can step the rear end out in a low traction situation, but you can control that with the throttle, and modern traction control systems do that for you.
2. Because the front wheels of a car have to turn (in order to steer), so the drive axle systems are a lot more complex. They use something called a CV joint to allow steering. These are covered by rubber boots which are exposed and easily torn, which will rapidly destroy them. Rear wheel drive does (sometimes) use CVs, but they're much better protected and don't have to be exposed, since the rear wheels don't turn for steering. Other RWD systems use a solid axle or U joints which are virtually maintenance free and cannot be damaged easily.
3. The ideal weight balance for handling is 50/50 - 50% of the weight is on the front wheels, 50% is on the rear wheels. With the entire drivetrain up front (engine+transmission+drive axles), the weight balance is more like 65/35. This means that the car will understeer or "plow", where when you turn the wheel, the car wants to keep going straight. With a RWD car, you have the heavy transmission towards the front of the car and the heavy differential+drive axles at the rear, making it a lot closer to (if not equal to) the idea 50/50 balance, which gives neutral handling - the car goes where you point it, period.
I forgot to include torque steer in #4, which someone else mentioned above.
Torque steer is what happens in most FWD cars when you hit the gas - the car dives to the left or right because of the unequal-length driveshafts of their FWD design. If you hit the gas in a RWD car, the car simply takes off, no diving for the ditch.
Yes but I was referring to Japanese workers - not those working in the U.S. The Japanese government provides complete healthcare benefits for all its native workers. The point I tried to make is that part of GM's problem is this enormous (over a $billion) liability for healthcare doesn't affect manufacturers in Japan as it does here.
The majority of the workforce making "Japanese" cars for the US *is* in America now. The Accord and the Camry are made here now.
This is an thirty year old story that just won't hunt any more.
1. Foreign Labor is cheaper - Well, Japanese companies build many of their U.S. Market cars in the U.S. - Accords in Ohio, Nissans in Tennessee, Toyota trucks in Texas, etc. Their labor costs are lower because none of them use UAW labor. If you really think that health care is such a big advantage for overseas companies, then why is Hyundai (a Korean company) building a new plant in the U.S.? That old whine about the governments subsidizing foreign car makers health care costs is just that- an old whine.
2. Japanese Keep U.S. Cars out- I was just in Japan two weeks ago; spent some time on Kyushu (the major southern island). There were lots of foreign cars. BMW's were the most common, then Mercedes, then Volvos, followed by VW's and a couple of Jaguars. I did see one Caddy, one Buick, one "Toyota" Cavalier, and a couple of Camaros.
The import barriers have been down for years.
The problem is still that traditional American cars are even less desirable on the tight, crowded roads of Japan that they are in the U.S.
Ford (Jaguar, Volvo, Land Rover) is doing quite well in Japan. Of, course, all those cars are available in right-hand drive - a handy little feature for Japan, which GM can't be bothered with.
By the way, the way the Japanese system works is that everyone pays a monthly tax to participate - roughly about $100. However, the phrase "complete" isn't the American equivalent of "complete". It's barracks-style wards, with coin operated tv's, etc. Very Basic - No Lazy-boys in your private room with a private 27 inch color tv like the U.S.
Thus many people pay for a supplemental health insurance which puts more comfort and care into their health care. That's right -workers pay for a supplemental insurance on top of their basic national health care
I think you make many excellent points about marketing failures on GM's part. I was only saying that in addition to those failures the healthcare liabilities add another billion dollars to the problem. In decades past there was only the "big three" (GM, Ford, Chrysler) and GM was so huge it could almost dictate fashion. Now Ford has been bumped from number 2 by Toyota and Chrysler isn't even the running. Also, the business today is completely internationalized. Ford owns Jaguar, Volvo, Kia, Mazda, etc. What is a "foreign" car? A VW manufactured in PA or a Kia assembled in South Korea? Where are the 60,000 parts made that are needed for the average vehicle? All over the world. But it's still a fact that Japan has an enormous competitive advantage because it provides complete healthcare for all its native workers. The competition has been good because it's forced American manufacturers to greatly improve quality control and be more innovative. The enormous healthcare liability isn't the ONLY problem but it's a significant one.
"Meanwhile, Ford, which has OHC engines, is most behind the curve on power"
I believe you will find the new Shelby Cobra with the supercharged 5.4L DOHC 450hp engine far from "behind the curve on power."
But look at most of Ford's engines; the 3.0 V-6 in the Five Hundred is woefully underpowered by today's standards. Look at the 4.6 V-8 in the Crown Vic. What does that put out? 218 hp? I have a 4.6 Triton in my F-150. A decent engine, but certainly a little bit underpowered by today's standards.
The 3V 4.6 in the Mustang is a good step forward, at least.
GM makes poor quality cars. They deserve to be losing money.
Tried to foist an import from Australia as a GTO.
Is as a direct result of this:
Failed to introduce new rear wheel drive sedans.
GM lacked a RWD platform for the new GTO, so they had to go to Holden to "borrow" one. Not a bad move, given the alternative. People want a FWD GTO like they want a skinny Santa.
I like it. It is understated, like GTOs from '64-'67. It was, back then, a derivative of the Tempest/LeMans. So for the sake of continuity, it bears a resemblance to the current Grand Prix. Were I in the market for a sedan, I'd be tempted to look in the new Goat's direction.
Actually I agree with you. Most of Fords lineup is underpowered, but I believe you can get one of those F-150's with a 5.4L 300hp engine.
What I am looking forward to is the new Challenger due out in 2007 with a 6.4L 450hp hemi.
Should be schweet! I admit that a lot of my attraction to the new GTO is based on fond memories of the '67 Goat I had when I was a teenager.
"Which models in the current Cadillac line are designed in Europe?"
As the new CTS was being developed, GM made a big deal to show it being tested in Germany. After it was introduced, they continued to highlight the European input for it.
Now GM has indicated it will try to sell Cadillacs in Europe.
The Catera of a few years ago was simply a "badged" Opel from Germany.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.