[Mattsack789]

On Motortrend.com, i've found an excellent plan for GM's restructuring. I think it's exactly what GM needs to do. Heres the link-http://www.motortrend.com/features/c...ans/index.html

[MerlinZero]

I agree with everything BUT the Corvette's replacement powertrain.... why in Sam Hell would they punch a twin turbo V6 in a corvette.... a V8 is a requirement....

a turbo 4.3... much like the Supercharged 4.3 out of the XLR-V caddy... I'd say...

It'd pull 29MPG hwy at about 450hp...

[SSINSTR]

V6 Vettes??? No thank you! The rest doesn't seem all that far fetched, of course it's easier said then done.

[The_Blur]

What happens when a TTV6 Camaro can beat a Corvette? Does the Camaro become the top car in Chevrolet's lineup or do the V8 crowd open their minds to other forms of high-performance?

[dragonZ28]

The new CAFE standards are the reason they weaken the Vette, and are really going to hurt this economy when they come to be. New cars won't have any power, and people will look to buy used cars with some power. Don't expect to see a 2016 Camaro.

Tell me, why help the auto industry just to give it some ludicrous standards to meet after you're done helping them? I would think that MPG would go up without government intervention and regualtion due to competition. Forcing it to happen, which can be argued as helpful or harmful, will only put strain on the companies and consumers. How much is the Volt going to cost??? At or above $40K - it won't sell all that well. Rinse and repeat for all models after 2016 and you have a disaster on your hands.

The really screwed up part is that if cars don't pass the requirements, consumers will have to pay that infamous "gas-guzzler" tax on a recurring basis. That'll sure help sell cars.

[josh1147]

I hate the guzzler tax....but it hasn't affected my buying habits. I also don't particularly believe the CAFE standards are going to affect a true sportscar buyer.

If I'm in the market for a sportscar then I have to pay the tax. I know that and so do you. I'm not sure why everyone thinks that people who want a particular car are unwilling to pay the tax. I don't want the manufacturers to compromise on performance just to meet some idiotic government standard.

It's just a part of the "new reality" of the American car business. Does it make me mad to pay it, yes. Will it stop me from buying, no. Has it changed my habits, no. I have 3 vehicles with 6.0L or larger. But I also own a Traverse with the direct injection which is just fun to drive! (really is)

When Americans decide to stop bending over for the politicians and actually stand up for their rights, it will begin to change. I doubt it will happen in my lifetime though.

[stovt001]

Sounds good, but they mention RWD often and I can tell you that's just not going to happen. GM seems to have no interest in future RWD. None. Zip. Nada.

The high output V6s sound really good, but I would hope to have V8s as well. Making smaller, higher tech V8s with slightly lower output coupled with lighter vehicles could be plausible, but that would require GM to take on a small bit of risk, innovate, invest, and have a little fun. I think RWD up there has a better chance.

[Zabo]

Originally Posted by stovt001

GM seems to have no interest in future RWD. None. Zip. Nada.

And this was GM's problem last time around.. it assumed way too much.

[Mr. Wyndham]

It sounds realistic. There are some things I don't agree with...but what do I know?

I do disagree with a perceived lack of interest by GM in RWD cars. One, because I'm not aware of a collective corporate consciousness...Two, because the folks within GM LOVE the Camaro, and Corvette...three, because Holden does RWD the way it was meant to be done, and they need a Commodore -- which means they need a new RWD platform...and four, the V6 Camaro dispelled all beliefs that RWD can't be efficient. At the very least, I bet it made some people pause and say "hmm...".

I think we'll see GM do 90% of what they said...not because MotorTrend knows how to run a car company better than a 100-year-old car company does...but because I think GM's been planning to do most of all that already.

Here's to hoping!

Originally Posted by stovt001

...but that would require GM to take on a small bit of risk, innovate, invest, and have a little fun....

You mean like the Camaro(risk, fun)?...like the Volt(innovate)?...the Malibu(invest)?

[Indpowr]

Why I have a V8 Corvette and a V8 Camaro...we will be happy for quite some time...hehe

[manimsoblack]

I agree with just about everything they said except for the weak engine on the Vette, unless it's losing a few hundred pounds 400hp has to be a minumum. if you can make that with a TT DI V6, so be it. make that the engine for the base Vette and the engine for the mid level next gen smaller Camaro.

Engines for the Camaro/Vette brands should be
Camaro Base 1, Mid 2/2.5, High 3
Corvette Base 2.5/3, Mid 3/3.5, High 4+ or something of the sort.

[Xmicro_SS]

Screw Motor Trend........Bunch of Loafer wearing, Yuppie, BMW Ass kissing, foreign car loving, douche bags.................But I read every issue!

[stovt001]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

You mean like the Camaro(risk, fun)?...like the Volt(innovate)?...the Malibu(invest)?

I have a feeling the Camaro is the last we'll see of its kind. A rare, final explosion of creativity, optimism, and gung-ho enthusiasm that will soon be suppressed by the same old passionless corporate mindset. I've been there before - as you probably know (look at my sig) I'm also a big Disney fan. Disney parks, and in particular Disneyland, went through decades of "dark ages" just like GM. It looked very similar - cost cutting, risk aversion, cookie-cutter products, corporate sterility, repression of creativity. Disney's California Adventure park is the perfect example of this problem, and Disney is now spending about as much as it cost to build it in the first place to fix it, which is much more than they would have spent to just do it to the original, properly Disney plans in the first place. Then along came Matt Ouimet, who replaced the loathed Pressler and Harriss as president, and he changed everything for Disneyland's 50th anniversary. New attractions were added and a huge year-long celebration event was planned, but most importantly the original emphasis on being a high-quality, clean, friendly alternative to a traditional theme park was restored. Things were great for years, just like in the golden age, but then Matt left. The president who took his place isn't bad, but you can see it slipping back to the bad old ways. Good product has been replaced with mindless marketing campaigns that absolutely ruin the whole atmosphere of the park. Cost cutting is back, and quality has slipped. New mechanical enhancements, like new monorails, a new dragon for fantasmic, new audio-animatronics, and a new "dream house" all have broken or otherwise failed due to design screw-ups.

Now look at that story, replace "Matt Oiumet" with "Bob Lutz" and theme park references with car references, and you have GM's story.

[Mr. Wyndham]

We'll see...but I still have to disagree.