Word has it that the proposal to bring a small, rear-wheel-drive compact Chevrolet (like the Code 130R Concept) to slot under the next-generation Camaro and compete in the space of the Scion FRS/Subaru BRZ twins is in jeopardy. Reportedly, it’s for a few reasons, with perhaps the most important one being that the car needs to exist on its own platform, which would have to be developed from scratch, requiring a lot of money to properly execute — something that has apparently been the roadblock for the project being approved. And developing a new architecture for the compact enthusiast-focused coupe also seems to go against GM’s plan to slash the number of platforms it uses in half from now until 2018 globally. That being said, I lost a few hours of sleep last night theorizing a situation that could make such a program possible.
I ruled out the idea of using the old Kappa platform (Pontiac Solstice, Saturn Sky) and shelved Kappa II project. They’re obviously not going to work. If they were going to, GM probably would have given the program the green light by now, and used the architecture.
Yours truly fantasizes of a small RWD platform with AWD capabilities that could be sold globally as a Chevrolet, in Australia as a Holden, and perhaps even as a Cadillac, as a true BMW 1 Series fighter (since Alpha is too big). Launch the Cadillac first, considering such a model has the most potential to rake in the most profits per vehicle sold — not unlike what we’re currently seeing with the Alpha-based ATS and CTS, before the sixth-generation Camaro arrives in less than two years from now. Then, launch the Chevy/Holden models. Even if it takes three of four years, it’s better than never. It would also be important that the platform be relevant enough that it can stay around for years to come, with incremental changes being made down the road (like the Mazda Miata). Eventually, it will all pay for itself. But surely, this plan has crossed Mark Reuss’ mind by now.
So, here’s the alternative. It is perhaps what needs to happen in order for the project to really see fruition.
Considering that Toyota had to team up with Subaru to bring the Scion FR-S/Toyota GT-86/Subaru BRZ to market globally, a compact rear-wheel-drive GM project might have to call on outside collaboration to really get it done. This would mean that GM and another automaker would have to put aside their differences and develop a vehicle for the good of the car enthusiast cause. The way I see it, the plan could be extremely beneficial.
Splitting the costs up with another car company just might appease the accountants. Plus, teaming up with a Japanese or European automaker could have some intangible gains in sales, considering the hold they have on their respective domestic markets, while GM’s is less than ideal outside of the Americas (and China). A joint-effort project would allow the vehicle to be badged under a non-GM moniker in those regions, yet would still help cover the costs of the project. The mystery however, is figuring out who would be up to the task. Mazda? Nissan? Honda? Chrysler? Daimler?
If anybody would like to expand on this thought, feel free to sound off in the comment section just below.
Comments
I WOULD say Mazda, but they’ve already got a deal with Alfa Romeo to develop a roadster based off the next gen Miata. Honda has some kind of aversion to RWD that is not fully explainable, so they’re out. Nissan makes a certain amount of sense, seeing as they need a small FR platform if they want to be taken seriously (FM can’t be shrunk that far, plus rumors have the Silvia name being affixed to something based off the Juke platform, hardly the ideal basis for a small sporty car).
Mazda is already in cahoots with Alfa for the next MX5-Miata/ Alfa spider
I think NIssan would be the best option, they have been talking about bringing out a new 240/280/300 to slot below the 370Z.
Honda is too scared to make anything sportier than the Civic Si or CR-Z (and we all how not efficient and not sporty that “sports hybrid” is).
Daimler can suck a nut. And they have the SLK. And I’m pretty sure that platform is as new as 2011.
Subaru and Toyota collaborated because GM sold their chunk of Fuji to Toyota.
Why no mention of Peugeot/ Citroen? They would be the logical tie. Not really a huge competitor to GM on a global scale and the partnership/ownership exists. Plus the French know how to make cars look good.. look good, not much else.
I would trust PSA with making a good MPV. Not a hoonmobile.
PSA can design it aesthetically and provide some funds, GM can do the real engineering.
Look at the Citroen GT and more importantly Survolt concepts. The DS3-R looks great too.
Puegoet has the RC-Z coupe. The Onyx concept and RC concept.
Their blue interior in the DS3 looks amazing, the dash is a bit to much shiny plastic, but the touch parts look amazing
The horse is almost dead but lets beat it some more… The data is there for a like vehicle in GM’s portfolio… As I said in the previos threads there is nothing exciting in the GM portfolio that is a used 2004 – 2010 and $8,000 other than “maybe” a Cobalt and Ion, thus a whole generation of Gen Y people are saying hmmm what can I drive where can I go… Gen Y the most massive future purchasers, how could the marketers have missed this… Now no question rich dads are looking at Sonics, Cruzes and Sparks for there beloved children but what about the others that are starting there kid out on the 8 to 10 grand vehicle… GM needs to think how there cars ar percieved 5 to 8 years down the road and who there customer base will be for a used Chevy, Buick ect… Wheres Pontiac oh ya thats right it doesn’t exsist…
Does GM dare team up with BMW?
The next 1 series, Z3 (confirmed for production), Cadillac subcompact, and Chevrolet roadster/sportscar can be the “Standard of Driving Machines”.
GM teamed up with BMW for transmission (I had one in my 2006 CTS) and I believe their most recent partnership is currently ongoing for hybrids
I feel like this car is great for a long term product plan, but simply won’t work as a car released by MY2018 or so.
As much as I would love for this to happen, realistically it’s not economically feasible at this time, especially this soon to post bailout. Gm needs to solidify its platforms and cut costs with boosting efficiency in the process. a few years down the road then I would not be surprised to see this project being vigorously pursued…but it’s too soon and that’s a Dam shame…..
For me it would have to be BMW (although the next 1 series will be fwd so maybe a little late for a small RWD hatch) but there’s still the 2 seater roadster sportscar option. This would include GM (Vauxhall/Opel, Buick, Chevy, Holden & Cadillac) and BMW (BMW, Mini, Triumph & numerous other brands BMW owns that would make it possible & profitable).
Easy, GM and PSA have teamed up in Europe. They should make a car based on the Peugeot RCZ
Pic: http://www.ausmotive.com/images/Peugeot-RCZ-01.jpg
FWD
though it would be cool for Buick
PSA I wouldn’t want them to build anything for/with GM. However business is business & regardless of their below class average models I can understand why GM joined up with them, 1) for their excellent Diesel engines, 2) even with below average models they are the second most popular brand in Europe.
I had considered this but to be honest there are no real dance partner that I can see unless there is some great change we can not see.
Mazda = Alfa
Honda = no real interest in RWD, they have done them but show little interest.
Nissan = Renault and really has never really been a team player
Chrysler = American competitor and owned by parent that owns Alfa
Daimler = Seldom plays with others.
Ford = No way would that happen on a platform at this time
BMW = Long shot as they have ties to Toyota already.
This is a deal where GM would need to do it in house and spread it out over several different variants and different kinds of models. It could be done but would GM be able to has this out internally to where everyone would be happy? Also earmark this for future products so the platform would have a long life.
The key here is a 2 seater is a limited market and not the answer. Also the 2+2 market is a limited market but better than the roadster. They would need to find a small sedan based on this to make it work. My thought is a small Buick sports sedan. let Buick go after the small 1 series cars.
I truly believe what has this hung up more at this time is the market protential is seen as limited and has yet to show great numbers from those who are already in. Second GM has a lot of work yet to do at Buick to fix them. They already have plans in place and product not far off.
I could see some more work and though will go into this. Look for some prototypes and show cars to come around to help convince those in GM that need to be convinced there is enough market to justify the expense to do this.
While a cool idea it still has to make money and GM is not in a place yet where they can afford to be wrong on something this big of an investment.
Even if this dies now it will come back an be revisited again in the future. If Toyota/Subaru sales are off the chart it will perk interest in those who need to change their mind. As of now they are selling but there are bigger profit fish to fry right now.
I think if they could tie this into Buick as a sedan it would help the profit picture. But then again what Alpha or Alphas will Buick be getting soon that may make this not as good of an Idea.
What we do not know at GM is the lynch pin here. Often their calls may not look wise till we know what they know.
BMW has the most potential here even if slightly tied in with Toyota ex GM development partner. I feel the potential for a modern day Firenza/Magnum, Manta and Torana is there – even a Astra 3dr shooting brake, VX220/Speedster, GT to name a few with many more options for other brands too, it could be done.
The other option could be risky and that’s a tie up with up and coming Kia/Hyundai they are growing in size & quality products and as yet don’t have a 2 seater (I’m sure it won’t be too long before they do) this could suit both party’s as they could both design one fit for purpose that’s all new in design.
GM could do it alone,a small RWD for Chevy and Holden,a new Opel Manta, for Cadillac a BMW serie 1 competitor, for Buick too it could be very interesting tohave a litle Solstice coupe.So GM could do it alone.
There are only really 5 companies that could foot this alone. Benz, GM, VW, Ford . Toyota could but they chose to spread the cost over Subaru that they own a share of.
Also they have quotas in some markets as to how many Subaru’s they can sell for every so many Toyota’s.
A small two seat car could be in the mix but it would have limited impact as it would not sell more than 20k units annually. These are cool cars everyone wants but few can afford to have as a third car and even fewer could live with as a daily driver.
I was speaking to a brand manager on two seat cars at GM. He said if you look at the history of most they are limited to 5-10 years and they die out. few like the Vette and Miata live on and on and on at a lower price.
It is easy to sell a expensive two seat car but a cheap one is a real challenge.
A 2 plus 2 would have a wide enough appeal to sell 50K-100K units on one model. If they did a RWD sport sedan it would expand it even more.
To me Chevy/Holden with a coupe and Buick/Opel with a sedan and GMC with some kind of off road version based on the architecture.
if you had to do a two seat version leave it to Cadillac unless they have something already planed for Alpha.
GM is so pathetic. Toyota DID IT with the FRS, GM still has to think about it? How exactly are they going to get the youth market & enthusiasts interested? With a rebadged POS Cavalier or Cobalt? That Michigan mentality of being hostile to RWD will lead them into bankruptcy again. Every market does not need to drive in snow.
I’d advise them to copy Toyota since they don’t seem to know what to do.
Using this to underpin a 1-series fighter for Cadillac in coupe and sedan form that will be sold globally (with China being very important to sales), a 2+2 for Chevy, Opel, Vauxhall, and Holden, plus maybe a convertible for Buick should be more than enough applications to spread the cost around
Here is the start of my idea to help Mr. Reuss with the new platform, no need to go out of GM completely: Start with the Wuling CN100 platform. Adapt the lessons and processes learned from Alpha. Should yield a light, cheap and scalable from subcompact to mid-size.
Use the live axle from the CN100 or adapt IRS. If the platform is being used for more than just subcompact, RWD cars then use IRS.
Use interior similar to the Sonic. It is sporty, youth oriented and cheap to adapt.
That is just the start.
Why the hell would anyone want to use heap of trash that underpins a Wuling van? Just because it’s RWD, this previously unknown compact van platform is now on the lips of nearly every hair trigger “gotta be RWD” fan as if it’s the greatest platform GM has ever made in recent memory that would “compete” with the 1 series and the 86.
Which is more surprising: an old compact van platform that exist in segment in China where nobody cares that it’s RWD, or that some people actually think that the Wuling platform was realistically considered to be “the silver bullet” that GM needs now to woo Gen Y.
Gen Y doesn’t have any money, but when they do spend money they are going to want the best, not a junk van platform from China with dash board from a Sonic that’s trying to act “sporty”.
Agree with Grawdaddy. This car will die quickly if it’s cheap. It needs to be made for longevity such that Gen-Y can buy it used. That means quality interior materials.
GM should copy MINI and generate profits by a-la-carte configuration. Enable every vehicle to be truly unique. The original buyer will be someone with money to fuel GM’s need for profit. Once the car gets into the used market the young people will then have an opportunity to buy something “different” at a price they can afford. But again, the car must be built to last.
A-la-carte is what I thought the Sonic Z-spec would be, and we know how that turned out. GM isn’t short of ideas. Their concept cars are a work of art. The problem lies in execution.
” copy MINI and generate profits by a-la-carte configuration. Enable every vehicle to be truly unique. ”
You are thinking of the Opel Adam, right?
Car and driver had interesting article:
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/2015-buick-grand-national-and-gnx-25-cars-worth-waiting-for-20142017-future-cars
So this is interesting
small ATS Alpha = Chevrolet Camaro
large CTS Alpha = Chevrolet Chevelle
Sorry the Alpha CTS may be the next SS in 2-3 years not a Chevelle.
I love reading all these comment and how easy it is for some to make a decision like this. But things become more difficult when you have to use all the facts and when you are on line for a billon dollar program.
This is no just a case of just do what Toyota did as GM’s place and needs are much different as Toyota is not rebuilding.
I do agree they do need to address the Gen Y group as they are the basis for much of the future. They really need to get some products to get their hand around and build trust with the product.
But on the other hand Gen Y is a very complex group as they are unlike past groups. Many do not drive and most have little love for the car so a large slice of his segment are not car people at all. There are some that are and these are the ones that need targeted with new product as the others will settle for product like a Cruze of Sonic.
Here is what this car needs to be Cheap and fun to drive. For anyone who has not driven the new Toyota it is not a super car by any means. It is not fast, it does not have world class grip but Toyota made it well balanced and fun to drive. That is the key here to keeping it cheap. Balance makes this car toss able and gives you high numbers on the fun to drive scale even if it may not be the fasted in a straight line or corner.
This really needs to be a higher quality better sorted Monza for this decade.
As for a Mini GM has one coming in the Opel 3 door hatch turbo. The only question is when will it get here? It is one sweet hatch in performance and styling and would do very well priced vs. Mini.
I wouldn’t copy of Toyota’s range or way of doing things (and that’s not because I find them boring cars) its because people are not daft they will realise hey GM are doing everything Toyota did 5 years ago. Then there’s the fact the market can change a lot in 5 years, and finally GM is GM & Toyota is Toyota two different company’s with different outlooks (hopefully) on how is the right way of doing things & turning a healthy profit.
In the USofA if you dont drive you dont get to work not everyone lives in Chicago and New York where there are transit systems so for Gen Y there is a need for vehicles that meet their needs. This idea that Gen Y doesnt like to drive where is this coming from, not sure I believe that, anyway Is Gen Y any more complex then Gen X I really dont think so. My recollection was reading articles about what is gen x who are they and all these rediculous articles about Gen X being a bunch of derilicts, how rediculous was that… Now we have so called marketers saying tediculous stuff about Gen y… Listen if you cant get to work theres a problem so there is an absolute need for transportation plain and simple…
Gen Y doesn’t have as much disposable income as Gen X did at their age.
Gen Y is more educated, but the job prospects aren’t there for them.
Gen Y will end up having to move often to chase after employment opportunities.
Gen Y is going to be tight with their money, and as such a car will be seen as an expensive luxury no matter who made it.
Sure, you’ll find the odd person who loves to hoon about in old Wranglers and Balzers on their father’s farm land, but those people are a minority in Gen Y. The majority of Gen Y lives in cities with and without proper transit systems. That, and the city offers the facilities and products that meet virtually all of their needs.
It’s not that Gen Y “doesn’t like driving”, it’s more like “why bother with a car if I have everything I need within walking distance or by bus and taxi?”
I’ve said before, Gen Y will force GM to become less of a car company and more of a transportation company.
The scenario you just mentioned has been in play for the last 25 years, people moving for their career… Iam Gen X and have moved 4 times in the last 12 years… I buy used GM cars ect…
The answer to the rwd platform is the Nissan van partnership. Partner with Nissan to develop a small rwd, oh I don’t know maybe something similar to a Z platform.
Back in the 70’s, Holden had a small/medium RWD car called the Torana. It could come in a hatchback (in today’s terms: “Sportback”). Not really a competitor to the Scion FRS/Toyota 86/Subaru BRZ as its more like a proper car than a driver’s car but it was RWD and V8 powered. A reborn Torana would be the same as a BMW 3-Series and a Merc C-Class. In the lead up to the VE Commodore reveal, Holden released a drivable concept car called Torana TT36, look it up!
DUDE GM teaming up with nissan for the 240sx…EPIC GM could learn a lot from nissan on how cars should be made…
A Buick 2 door Car.
Is what I want.
Bob