General Motors To Double Lifespan Of New Vehicle Platforms
34
Sponsored Links
Remember when General Motors touted the frequency with which it redesigns its vehicles? Well, those days could soon be over as the automaker lays the groundwork to double the lifespan of its new vehicle platforms as part of an initiative to reduce and redirect capital spending, while also boosting profit margins.
The first vehicle architecture to follow the strategy is GM’s new D2 platform, which underpins a wide gamut of compact cars and crossovers, including:
- 2016 Chevrolet Cruze and newer
- 2016 Chevrolet Volt and newer
- 2015 Opel Astra, Vauxhall Astra, Holden Astra and newer
- 2016 Buick Verano and newer
- 2015 Buick Excelle and newer
- 2016 Buick Envision and newer
- 2018 Chevrolet Equinox and newer
- 2018 GMC Terrain and newer
The company is targeting for up to 2.5 million vehicle sales a year for the D2 platform underpinning the Cruze and Astra, says GM product chief Mark Reuss. It has also been rumored that a future compact Cadillac vehicle is also under development on the same D2 architecture.
A vehicle’s platform — the basic underpinnings of a car or truck — could last a dozen years or more, according to GM President Dan Amman. The strategy is representative of today’s global car business in which automakers must balance developing new vehicles for global markets and keeping those vehicles fresh in the face of stricter emissions and safety standards, while facing the threat of slowing car sales and disruptive new products and services, such as autonomous vehicles, ride hailing and car sharing services, all while returning more cash to shareholders.
Over the next several years, General Motors is said to undertake the most extensive overhaul of its vehicle development process in decades. The objective of the undertaking is to engineer its global vehicle lineup using just several building blocks, or platforms, thereby spreading the research and development costs for a given line of cars and SUVs over millions more vehicles.
The plan calls for keeping the platforms largely the same for over a decade, while changing styling more often with updates to the sheet metal or plastic skins referred to as “top hats” internally within GM. The automaker also plans to update a vehicle’s electronic features using software updates delivered over a high-speed internet connection, such as the one built into nearly all 2015 and newer GM vehicles through OnStar 4G LTE services.
The strategy isn’t without risks, the most notable of which is the possibility of being left with technologically-outdated platforms. Another potential downside seen by analysts is not delivering a product that is attractive to customers across various global markets. Both potential hazards also apply to GM’s competitors, which are also moving to trim the amount of vehicle platforms to decrease complexity, cut costs, and boost margins.
Sponsored Links
This is a sure sign that the industry is bracing for a major slump. It has been predicted and GM has been preparing and they are not the only ones that will be doing this.
The one thing that will help is that the new platforms are very adaptable with their hard points so new platforms are not needed to make very different products. Example the Sonic and Encore are the same platform.
what will the RWD Alpha and Omega platforms life span will be ???
It depends on how you characterize those. Alpha will be succeeded by Alpha 2. What we don’t exactly know is whether it will be a complete overhaul of the architecture or a spot-based update. My personal expectation is for it to be an incremental update rather than a complete revamp.
Either way, Alpha and Omega are excellent platforms that need to underpin vehicles that have received more attention to detail inside and out.
Well, look at it this way, folks: Everybody’s favorite toaster on wheels, the Toyota Camry, has run on the same architecture for 2-3 redesigns. The platform that came before dated back to when Toyotas were actually great cars – the mid-90’s.
Ford got three DECADES from its Panther platform. Which only underpinned who-knows-how many taxis and cop cars after GM retired the B after 1996.
New architecture’s nice but I’d rather the General nail it with an outstanding platform that can survive a few redesigns, making it easier to allocate resources to better execution and features.
I know that the bean counters have to have their say but it is a bad idea for a platform to have a lifespan of 10-15years. So many things can change over that period of time.
Think of a 2001 Buick LaSabre compared to a 2016 LaCrosse. Which one would you want?
More recently the 2017 Cruze is better in every conceivable way than the 2011 Cruze that it replaces. If GM had decided to keep that Delta platform around for another 8 years it would have been woefully uncompetitive against others in the segment.
I suspect that will continually play out If GM keeps platforms kicking around for double their normal lifespan.
That’s really not the point though. The point is to build platforms worthy of being called class-leading first, then keep them around for a decade or so.
By contrast, in the examples you bring up, the platforms underpinning the LeSabre and first-gen Cruze were decent, but in no way were they class leading. In the case of the LeSabre, the G platform was a hack job of getting a replacement for H out the door quickly, and details were not the focus of the project. Meanwhile, the Delta II underpinning the Cruze was actually pretty good, but it was quite hefty and carried many legacy technologies and features from Delta I.
Compare that with E2 on which the new LaCrosse sits and D2 on which the new Cruze rides: each is high-tech, was built from their very inception to support a vehicle family for a decade or more, and has other ways of delivering updates (such as infotainment system updates via OnStar 4G LTE).
Keeping the LeSabre’s G platform would have been very uncompetitive, and keeping Delta Ii from the first-gen Cruze would have been decent, albeit the resulting vehicle would have been a bit on the heavy side in the segment. Meanwhile, E2, D2, and whatever future variants were designed from the get-go with proper dev funds, without cutting corners, with light-weighting techniques not used by others, and with modern engineering techniques. These platforms start out “ahead” and by the time they reach end of life, they will still be competitive.
It’s also vital to note that the first-gen Cruze was actually around for 8 years: it was introduced in 2008 in Korea and Europe, but only made its way to North America 2-3 years later (depending on market). Even until its EOL in 2016, it remained a very competent vehicle in the class, and would have been even more so if the hatch variant were on sale here, and if there were a hotted-up variant analogous to the Opel Astra OPC. Another example of that is Theta II under the second-gen Equinox and first-gen Terrain: both have been on the market for 8 model years by the time the crossovers will be sun-set. Yet both Delta II and Theta II were developed in an environment of cost cutting, while the new platforms were engineered with… let’s say… more adequate resources.
Alex fair enough points but there is no platform in the world , regardless of how high tech it is, that will still be class leading 10+ years down the road.
GM does not keep a platform around for only 5 years before a redo as your ‘decade or so’ comment suggests. The Cruze was around for over 8 years so doubling it would be 15 or 16 years.
Despite valiant attempts to keep it current that platform and the vehicles it underpins will look and feel its age and will be uncompetitive.
Speaking of D2 (Cruze) chassis it is hardly world beating and not even class leading out of the box. The Cruze finished 3rd out of 5 compact cars in a recent Car and Driver comparo against some vehicles that had been on the market already for over a year.
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2016-chevrolet-cruze-vs-2016-honda-civic-2017-hyundai-elantra-2016-mazda-3-2016-nissan-sentra-comparison-test
In 10 years the Cruze will be even further behind the pack without relentless improvements.
GM should double down on product life cycle by keeping the existing 7 or 8 year platform lifespan and doing more MCE’s to keep the vehicles at the top of their respective segments.
The Apha chassis should have already had a MCE but clearly GM/Cadillac will wait until to a full redo in a couple of years to address it’s issues meanwhile BMW and MB have come out with a new 3 Series and C Class respectively to further strengthen their hold on the segment while Cadillac stays stagnant.
GM went from Epsilon to Global Epsilon in the blink of a decade. Meanwhile, Toyota and Honda kept on rolling. GM, regarding successful models, already focused on long life spans: Cruze, Astra, Insignia, Enclave, Equinox, Commodore and so on. FCA demonstrates the power of refreshes/updates with the LX twins–Charger and 300 look sleek.
When will GM leap from platforms to architectures like VW? I don’t think that it matters, but the overall industry seems to be impressed.
Cadillac need an all-new design theme…I believe Cadillacs design theme is getting stale and the Camaro just looks like the previous modal….they should bring radical design changes in the same platform and Caddy could do it with the Alpha 2 and Omega 2.
The design-related opinions you are stating has absolutely nothing to do with platforms.
so can they do a radical design changes on the current platforms ???
Wouldn’t that be the same with the theta and lambda platform?
Definitely a risky maneuver, the Dodge Charger for example is built on a platform from the 90s, and they’re constantly having issues shoehorning new tech and safety features into them. After Daimler raped and pillaged them, they were left with nothing but outdated tech and are still having issues finding a proper chassis as a replacement under Fiat. As long as they’re continuing to R&D but not necessarily deploy and build until current architectures are exhausted, that’ll be fine, but we’re seeing Chrysler with their pants down for extending these platforms past their lifespan.
the Alpha and Omega platforms need to fix there interior packaging and exterior designs if GM wants to appeal costumers in the future…..if GM doubles it’s platforms lifespan…GM will have a reputation for being stale.
Article forgot the second-generation Volt, which also uses D2.
My big concern with this strategy is that D2 does not have an all-electric solution. If there’s a long term gas crisis, that will leave GM with no mid-size EV option – or worse, having to mule one up from the Volt, and have a dissatisfying product.
Bolt?
Bolt looks like a large car at a distance… put it next to a Cruze and you start to see the problems, should a gas crisis emerge.
GM is putting Voltec into E2XX, but that is still Voltec. There is a product hole here for a mid-size EV, should GM need one if a gas crisis breaks out. They’ll be left telling customers to go to a smaller car.
It may surprise folks, but FCA actually pre-planned their CUSW cars to be EV-ready, with skateboard battery slot placements in the car’s undercarriage. In a gas crisis, Sterling Heights can start making 200 EV’s within 12-18 months notice. The EV system is already being tested in the Pacifica, right now.
My concern is that this strategy could leave GM exposed in a gas crisis… which is what people think about FCA’s no-more-cars strategy, but FCA has the plants tooled to resume production of competitive (EV) cars rapidly. GM lacks any EV’s beyond Bolt and Bolt’s micro-SUV cousin.
A gas crisis is a legitimate long term concern but NA is likely a decade from seen any significant increase in gas prices.
Currently there is over production and further billions of gallons available from fracking (for the better or worse) and the oil sands of Western Canada.
By then there will be a next generation of D2XX or similar.
These gen 2 voltec electric e-CVt drivetrain Is on these E2xx chasis now.
You do realize these bolt is a flat floor skateboard chassis design that is modular right, they car make it any size they wanted to, and will. Why do you think they don’t or can’t make anything larger off these skateboard chassis of the bolt, being a fully all electric car? Go talk to these engineers about.
Skateboard chassis /= Any size design.
I am sure that BEV2 was built with a CUV in mind. They’ve admitted as much, not to mention the SUV bolt-on blocks in the back of the chassis that are well documented already.
But you can’t make a Cruze EV out of BEV2 without major, major platform changes. It’s a stretched Gamma in that regard, not a D2 equal.
It is a flat batteries skateboard chassis design. The way it looks they can take these new chassis, D2xx,E2xx,G2xx, alpha, omega chassis parts and put it on flat batteries chassis design.
We know that isn’t true, because BEV2 wouldn’t exist if G2XX could handle the Bolt EV.
Current GM designs are not “skateboard battery” ready. GM admitted this when they explained how they had to tear apart G2XX and start from scratch to create BEV2.
Who is we ? I have never herd gm say any like that. I, myself have never herd gm say that.
First, learn to reply with threaded comments.
Second, go read one of the many interviews with Stuart Norris… including where he defines the one part in common between G2XX and BEV2 – noise-reducing paint.
I wounder if the Alpha and Omega platforms will last 15-16 years.
Certainly not as they are. A2XX is already in the works to replace Alpha – and possibly Omega too.
This is because to shed weight from Zeta, the Alpha team gutted RHD – only months later to realize that they should have kept RHD as Holden would exit manufacturing, along with Zeta II being cancelled.
So they have to make a new global RWD platform to support RHD. A2XX is it. And with CT6 sales lackluster, I think they’ll go big and try to absorb Omega into it.
Agree except I do not think CT6 sales are lackluster. Consider the space they are operating in, the price they are selling for and that mid-sized/large luxury sedans in general have depressed sales right now.
Ok you win, I will back away I know not to talk to any more.
Scott3, do you know if these flat batteries design on the bolt, is modular?
A2XX replaces Alpha.
O2XX replaces Omega.
I can see that happening in the next decade and possibly they can make the O2XX platform EV powered instead of gas engines.
O2XX to underpin the 2nd generation CT6 and and larger CT8 in the 2023-2025 timeframe.
There will still be a gas propelled version of the CT6 and CT8 even 10 years in the future.
Petroleum is not going away that quickly. Oil is still plentiful and relatively cheap plus a proven and reliable infrastructure.
If they’re smart, they’ll build 3 or 4 Cadillac crossovers on Omega as well.
agreed…..they should of made the flagship a CUV/SUV on the Omega platform instead of a sedan…..they screwed up there by making a sedan and having just one vehicle on the Omega platform…..they won’t make anymore vehicles on the Omega platform because
(1) they can’t create a CUV on the Omega platform.
(2) they won’t make enother sedan on the Omega platform because it will be a money loser.
I find it sad that they screwed up with the Omega platform…and I have feeling that they spent all that money for a platform that won’t make money.