Sky, Solstice and Corvette: S.O.S.

[Guest Josh]

Well your favorite company trained me! And you?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was trained by the best. The Causleys before I moved onto bigger and better things because of the slow market in auto sales.

The Causleys are the biggest & largest Pontiac and GMC dealership in the United States. I think it counts for something.

[evok]

So that's why you have a GMS discount right, evok?  Count me in as one of the guys who really values your insider opinions and insights on this site and others that you post at.  BTW, I (under a different name) enjoyed bantering with you on AH-HA's old site.

Appreciate the kind words. Seems I am on the $hit list with a few around here because of my blunt tone at times. PM and refresh me on your MO at the old AH-HA site. It was good over there and reminded me of the old TCC days. We are working in theory on version 2.0.

I think i might need your support around here in affirming that I can have a civil discussion when... Read the rest of this thread.

ha ha - Either way thanks again.

[evok]

I was trained by the best. The Causleys before I moved onto bigger and better things because of the slow market in auto sales.

The Causleys are the biggest & largest Pontiac and GMC dealership in the United States. I think it counts for something.

Josh, really I do not care.

[Guest Josh]

Josh, really I do not care.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And you are really not on the &#036;h&#33; list as much as I am! But, I do remember what was said to me before by yourself and others and I've let it roll right off my shoulders.

Dont feel bad if people bust your chops, at least they are not out to ruin you by a faux image with the encouragement to feature it on the site you pay for.

[CaddyXLR-V]

Appreciate the kind words.  Seems I am on the $hit list with a few around here because of my blunt tone at times.  PM and refresh me on your MO at the old AH-HA site.  It was good over there and reminded me of the old TCC days.  We are working in theory on version 2.0.

I think i might need your support around here in affirming that I can have a civil discussion when...  Read the rest of this thread.

ha ha - Either way thanks again.

Don't worry, the vast majority here still supports you, even if a few may question your knowledge.

[Croc]

What I'm trying to say is, everything happens for a reason and there is a far and away better Kappa coming along the way. They simply couldnt afford to delay it another 12 or 18 months Croc. If they did, it would have cost them more $$$$ overall and would have never made a profit. Furthermore........the $$$$$ as not there for them to delay it for more engineering dollars.

There's so much more that goes into making a car than me you or anybody else saying "yea....buuuuuut"

Yea but nothing. If you want to design and manufacture cars get your degree to do so.

Bull. There would be no "far and away better" Kappa coming if the first one had been done right.

GM actually could have (and should have) afforded to spend more money to engineer Kappa for greater flexibility. Yes, it would have cost more money in the short term...but then we would have a platform that could be used for many years and even more vehicles. Platform engineering costs are amortized over time and through volume. The higher the volume a platform the sooner its costs get paid off. Again, it will take a lot longer to pay off Kappa through 2-seat roadsters than if we had 2-seat roadsters...and small sport coupes, hatches/sportwagons or even sedans. All of those would lead to more volume. More volume leads to greater profitability.

Oh, and in 2003, GM's future cash problems were quite predictable. The GM of today is a continuation of the trends of the past decade (at least!). GM's turnaround plan has been in the works ever since Wagoner brought Lutz on board, and that wasn't 12 months ago.

[evok]

And you are really not on the &#036;h&#33; list as much as I am! But, I do remember what was said to me before by yourself and others and I've let it roll right off my shoulders.

Dont feel bad if people bust your chops, at least they are not out to ruin you by a faux image with the encouragement to feature it on the site you pay for.

Josh: Croc can attest to it, I will throw my words around, especially when I know/think/believe or an IMO the discussion is not correct. Croc knows this and even The O.C. a personal friend for 20 years can atest to. We have bantered back and forth about all the discussion on these boards long before there was the internet. I do not hold grudges. Really, does it really matter what any of us say around here in the end. I never asked for or sought anything when I started posting years ago. No, I did not want to be labeled an insider, I did not want any claim to fame, or warning from auto companies etc. I posted starting on TCC not to give the scoop but for one reason only, because I wanted to talk cars. That is it.

To that end, Josh, I just want to talk cars.

[Guest Josh]

By God Croc knew GM would lose $10B in 2005 some three years ago yet I am hard pressed to see where you've ever said it. Quite predictable indeed!

[CaddyXLR-V]

Bull.  There would be no "far and away better" Kappa coming if the first one had been done right.

GM actually could have (and should have) afforded to spend more money to engineer Kappa for greater flexibility.  Yes, it would have cost more money in the short term...but then we would have a platform that could be used for many years and even more vehicles.  Platform engineering costs are amortized over time and through volume.  The higher the volume a platform the sooner its costs get paid off.  Again, it will take a lot longer to pay off Kappa through 2-seat roadsters than if we had 2-seat roadsters...and small sport coupes, hatches/sportwagons or even sedans.  All of those would lead to more volume.  More volume leads to greater profitability.

Oh, and in 2003, GM's future cash problems were quite predictable.  The GM of today is a continuation of the trends of the past decade (at least!).  GM's turnaround plan has been in the works ever since Wagoner brought Lutz on board, and that wasn't 12 months ago.

True, and actually it wouldn't have had to be delayed either, since the platform was designed from scratch anyway. If it was designed more flexible from the beginning, we could have had the more flexible kappa released at the same time the current kappa was released.

[Croc]

By God Croc knew GM would lose $10B in 2005 some three years ago yet I am hard pressed to see where you've ever said it. Quite predictable indeed!

No. That is not what I said. Re-read my post.

[Croc]

True, and actually it wouldn't have had to be delayed either, since the platform was designed from scratch anyway. If it was designed more flexible from the beginning, we could have had the more flexible kappa released at the same time the current kappa was released.

Actually, I think it would have been delayed, but slightly. Nothing significant. Though IMO, I don't think any delay would be significant since GM is making small RWD roadsters a competitive segment instead of a single offering by Mazda. The fact that they were released later than the MX-5 would be made up by their addressing the current Kappa shortcomings (of course assuming that GM would have actually designed the platform better given more time).

ETA: the MX-5 is so evolutionary...I think most of the sales of the Kappa twins are simply due to the fact that they are visually different than the Miata, which has looked about the same for over a decade.

Edited April 24, 2006 by Croc

[Trimnell1]

Appreciate the kind words.  Seems I am on the $hit list with a few around here because of my blunt tone at times.  PM and refresh me on your MO at the old AH-HA site.  It was good over there and reminded me of the old TCC days.  We are working in theory on version 2.0.

I think i might need your support around here in affirming that I can have a civil discussion when...  Read the rest of this thread.

ha ha - Either way thanks again.

Message sent, although I might have accidently sent two copies of the same message to you. If you didn't recieve it, post here again and I will try again to get ahold of you.

[evok]

Message sent, although I might have accidently sent two copies of the same message to you.  If you didn't recieve it, post here again and I will try again to get ahold of you.

Check your mail. Got ya.

[evok]

By God Croc knew GM would lose $10B in 2005 some three years ago yet I am hard pressed to see where you've ever said it. Quite predictable indeed!

Actually there was a post on the last CG boards back in Nov04 where I was one of the first to state publically that GM would loose money in the 1st and 2ndQ05. Some around here refreshed my memory last June 05. But I never anticipated implosion!

[evok]

Don't worry, the vast majority here still supports you, even if a few may question your knowledge.

Thanks and appreciate the thought.

[ZL-1]

Count me in as one of the guys who really values your insider opinions and insights on this site and others that you post at.  BTW, I (under a different name) enjoyed bantering with you on AH-HA's old site.

x2

What name did you use there, btw? I used my real name there.

[ehaase]

It was good over there and reminded me of the old TCC days.  We are working in theory on version 2.0.

I hope that you will keep those of us who have been your and AH-HA's fans since the TCC days updated on version 2.0.

[bowtie_dude]

Am I right in assuming that GMs losses in the past year and a half were pretty much unstoppable by the time Lutz came on board?

And, evok, if you are privvy to GMs "Return to Greatness" strategy, does it seem viable or do you think its too little too late? Or are you just playing a wait and see game right now?

[evok]

Am I right in assuming that GMs losses in the past year and a half were pretty much unstoppable by the time Lutz came on board?

And, evok, if you are privvy to GMs "Return to Greatness" strategy, does it seem viable or do you think its too little too late?  Or are you just playing a wait and see game right now?

This sums it up.

http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?A...315/1148/AUTO01

[enzl]

This sums it up.

http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?A...315/1148/AUTO01

As does this:

http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/21/news/compa...dex.htm?cnn=yes

I love the Kappas...its too bad that the platform can't be more useful at this time....a 200k sellout would make a difference to the bottom line, plus, put more fresh, inventive and exciting product on the street to counteract the perception that only rental car companies and gov't agencies are buying GM mainstream product.

[Camino LS6]

Josh:  Croc can attest to it, I will throw my words around, especially when I know/think/believe or an IMO the discussion is not correct.  Croc knows this and even The O.C. a personal friend for 20 years can atest to. We have bantered back and forth about all the discussion on these boards long before there was the internet.  I do not hold grudges. Really, does it really matter what any of us say around here in the end.  I never asked for or sought anything when I started posting years ago.  No, I did not want to be labeled an insider, I did not want any claim to fame, or warning from auto companies etc.  I posted starting on TCC not to give the scoop but for one reason only, because I wanted to talk cars.  That is it.

To that end, Josh, I just want to talk cars.

I find this post to be very encouraging.

This entire thread has lead me to the conclusion that we have all missed an opportunity to make the discussion more worthwhile. By that I mean that we get into a pattern of attempting to disprove one another's assertions without fully understanding them. I believe that following a pattern of questioning rather than criticizing would improve the quality overall. I have re-read the thread again and again and attempted to distill the information down to the core of the disagreement.

Putting all of the personal criticisms aside, this is what it comes down to in simple terms as far as I can see.

One side of the debate feels that the release of Kappa was premature and that it would have been a better course of action to delay the release until a more volume rich architecture was ready. The conclusion being that the decision not to wait was a bad business move.

The other side believes that to have delayed would have been a major mistake and that the relatively small investment in Kappa is more than justified by bringing hot product to market now. This side also places a greater value on the goodwill generated by the current availability of these cars and believes that it makes a better case for Kappa II than could have been made if they were still upcoming. The conclusion being that the correct business decision was made.

My conclusion is that we simply have two opposing strategies here and that only in hindsight will we be able to say with any credibility which position is correct. I do think that we could reach a better understanding of the whole topic by asking such questions as "why do you believe X and not Y?" of each other. Rather than attempting to refute the "other side's" position, we could come to a more complete assessment of the issue and draw our own more considered conclusions.

[sciguy_0504]

Exactly.  Companies can/should do more image vehicles when the finances are all in order.  A company making a frivolous, limited low-volume vehicle platform "because they can" while they are reporting $10B losses is just stupid.  Toyota, however, is swimming in cash and can afford to waste money.

Not only that, the first-gen Prius was used as a public experiment of sorts so the new technology could be tested on a large scale. At that time, it could be said, the technology Toyota used was the best it could be and it was expanded on with the second-gen Prius. The SKY/Solstice do not have any groundbreaking new technology or gizmos and the second-gen SKY/Solstice will not have any, either.

[Camino LS6]

Let me demonstrate what I have outlined in my above post.

Three questions:

Do you believe we have already seen all of the Kappa variants that will be produced on the current platform?

Do you think that GM will increase production of the current platform?

If more variants are approved for production and/or more capacity is dialed in at Wilmington, would that change your view of the business decision to release Kappa in its current form?

[Guest Josh]

I'll say this before I rest my case on the production of Kappa.

The hybrids wont make GM $$$$ anytime soon, so should they also pull the plug on those?

[Croc]

Do you believe we have already seen all of the Kappa variants that will be produced on the current platform?

I highly doubt we will see anything other than a 2-seat roadster on Kappa. I think it might be possible that a SAAB version may be approved...but I personally do not think that it has any more of a shot at production than a Bengal, in fact less. I do not think the SAAB could sell for much more than the Bengal would have, and the Bengal would certainly sell more units with a more extensive dealer network (although sharing showroom space with the Solstice). I think GM is already saturating the market, and any additional models should be badge jobs in other countries. I wonder if a Buick badge job of the Solstice for export to China would be a good idea or not...something that would cost very little to develop but would snag a few more sales.

[Croc]

The hybrids wont make GM $$$$ anytime soon, so should they also pull the plug on those?

Which hybrids are you referring to?

GM plans its hybrids around a model program profitability model. By that I mean the GMT900 hybrids are not measured on their own, but within the context of the entire GMT900 program. The image goodwill GM receives on the few they make and sell (relative to the production and sale of non-hybrid models) is certainly more than worth the small amount of money (again, relatively speaking) that GM might lose per hybrid model. The GMT900s are GM's cash cows...that program most definitely will see profitability.

GM appears at this point to be only including hybrid models on established volume products. As such, I do not believe GM will actually lose money on hybrid models offered, though they may earn less profit on the vehicle program as a whole.

I think this is why we will likely see Greenline hybrids and Tahoe hybrids, but no Cobalt, Malibu or G6 hybrids (for the time being). GM is producing them to compete with the competition, but guaranteeing their volumes will be limited so they do not cost GM much in the way of profits per sale.

[ShadowDog]

I'm not of the opinion that the market will judge the not-so successful automobiles based on the 'reported' success of a few halo cars. With a parallel situation being the Zeta project, would GM be any better off if they had completed the design phase and began production on the Camaro? I'm thinking money was better spent on futhering development of other product, specifically, GMT900.

So I ask, would it not be of more benefit to design and produce the cake first, instead of the icing? Halo cars can only promote themselves if the automobiles beneath them haven't been high on the list of buyers. Does that mean, to me, that Kappa was a waste of time? Not really; however, that doesn't mean it was money well spent at a time like this.

[The O.C.]

Not if they are all similar targets.  Look at the Infiniti FX, G35 coupe and sedan, Nissan 350Z...all of those are very successful vehicles, and all are on the same platform, with just a few modifications here and there.  They are pretty different targets, no?  So...what's Nissan/Infiniti's secret of producing one platform that is flexible enough for multiple variants?

If GM had been more practical, they could have produced a small RWD platform that could spawn small roadsters, compact coupes, maybe even a sedan or hatch/sportwagon.  One platform can underpin a wide variety of vehicles successfully as long as each application is calibrated and tuned for the needs of each segment.  If Nissan/Infiniti can do it, then GM could have as well.

Excellent example AND point......

Also, look at Toyota.....Camry/Solara/Avalon/Highlander as another example

[The O.C.]

Why are we debating whether or not Kappa is good or bad because of GM's financial situation right now.

The program was started back in 2003 when the grasses were much greener. Why are we beating each other up over the Kappa that is out right now instead of the one that is going to be out towards the end of the decade?

BECAUSE.....in '03, GM WASN'T buidling a "better Camry" and they still aren't.

GM should have been focusing on a "better Camry" a DECADE ago....much less in '03...and CERTAINLY not as late as now....

Those funds would have been much better utilized in other areas back in '03....or in '06...however you want to look at it.

[turbo200]

Let me demonstrate what I have outlined in my above post.

Three questions:

Do you believe we have already seen all of the Kappa variants that will be produced on the current platform?

Do you think that GM will increase production of the current platform?

If more variants are approved for production and/or more capacity is dialed in at Wilmington, would that change your view of the business decision to release Kappa in its current form?

I don't know if we have already seen all the variants of current Kappa. From what we know of it, it is very inflexible, and can only produce, feasibly, a car with a rear center tunnel, if back seats are to be incorporated, and for any real volume to happen, they must. I would love to see a Pontiac in the vein of the Mazda RX-8 and think it would be a great sales success, as well as product that GM needs, like enzl said above, to convince the country GMs are not just for rental agencies.

I do not think GM will or should be able to increase production on the current lineup of Kappas. No way, no how. sales will prove demand is limited, and every other GM cars has supply that outstrips demand. For once, I'd like to see GM take the honorable route.

Well, if more variants were produced on the current Kappa platform, and were not produced in the same scope as the Solstice/Sky, meaning they were not limited by volume or otherwise small market cars, than that would improve the business case for this platform, thereby pacifying our request for better volume because of the potential of a small RWD platform. So the answer is yea. It's the potential of what could come off of a small RWD platform, someone said above all the RWD variants that could come for Pontiac, and I have been saying this for YEARS, literally I was the first to call for this, you can ask anyone around here, YEARS, I have been asking for RWD cars for Pontiac, give me RWD G4, G6 wagons coupes verts sedans. The potential of what this platform could have been had they taken the time is what gets me.

[turbo200]

I was trained by the best. The Causleys before I moved onto bigger and better things because of the slow market in auto sales.

The Causleys are the biggest & largest Pontiac and GMC dealership in the United States. I think it counts for something.

Sorry, I am not trying to offend you. It counts for almost nothing. Any JMoe Shmoe can become a car salesmen. I am gonna be one. I am training now. It's not hard. And I will sell a lot. I'm 21, with no experience, and I will do extremely well. Possibly at least one car a day, on average. Based on the traffic and how good I am. I am passionate and I talk lovely to people. It's a gift. It's not hard, trust me. So, no this doesn't count for much. And the car sales side on this side of the pond is going gravy.

[turbo200]

And you are really not on the &#036;h&#33; list as much as I am! But, I do remember what was said to me before by yourself and others and I've let it roll right off my shoulders.

Dont feel bad if people bust your chops, at least they are not out to ruin you by a faux image with the encouragement to feature it on the site you pay for.

Just a question, but who exactly has you on thier &#036;h&#33; list? If you think it's me, cross me off. I just feel the extreme need to address you when say somehting stupid and assanine. I never called for you to give up your position, all hail that position, blah blah. I still respect you, and will give you a chance. But sometimes I'm sitting here, and I see something you say, Josh, and I'm like oh he didn't f@#king say that again. You've got this ego that needs to be worked on. Again, my tone is more like I wanna give this guy the respect he deserves but damn is he putting his foot in his mouth.

[turbo200]

One more thing to this comment. This element of this site is what makes it wonderful. That we can all be this candid and neutral with each other. We are totally constructive and helpful with each other, where if this was another site with different people, they would never handle each other with such tact and care. There is something to be said for that, and Josh you can include yourself in there.

[turbo200]

I'll say this before I rest my case on the production of Kappa.

The hybrids wont make GM $$$$ anytime soon, so should they also pull the plug on those?

Are we saying boot the damn Kappas? Or are we saying, make Solstice/Sky, but on a better, more flexible platform. How flexible was Sigma, and every other freakin platform, promised to be, and yet when reality comes to it, they really are not flexible.

And I agree with Croc's assessment on the profitability of hybrids. And they can potentially affect a lot more of the population than Kappa's current form.

[turbo200]

As for possible Kappa variants, I would not like to see any more roadster from GM, unless it's a soft top Z4 competitor from Cadillac. Worth the price of entry with an incredible interior with the highest quality materials, with a turbo 300 hp engine standard, and with SMG as an option. License the damn technology if you can't build it. Build this car off Kappa, KEEP THE WEIGHT DOWN, and price it around 40k-46k. Make sure the damn interior is super incredible! Sit in recent new Hondas to see the quantam leaps that are happenning in the auto industry in terms of materials. Civic has better materials choices than the damn STS!!!!!!!!!! for Christ's sake. Seek excellence. Do this and you will have a hit.

Other than that roadster, a hardtop coupe like previewed by the Saab Aero-X would be awesome, and with the right features and power, and interior, could fetch a high starting price. Like say, 35k. Limited volume, though, is it worth the investment?

With Kappa being so unflexible, I don't see much of anything else happenning. It's a shame, really.

[Camino LS6]

I don't know if we have already seen all the variants of current Kappa. From what we know of it, it is very inflexible, and can only produce, feasibly, a car with a rear center tunnel, if back seats are to be incorporated, and for any real volume to happen, they must. I would love to see a Pontiac in the vein of the Mazda RX-8 and think it would be a great sales success, as well as product that GM needs, like enzl said above, to convince the country GMs are not just for rental agencies.

I do not think GM will or should be able to increase production on the current lineup of Kappas. No way, no how. sales will prove demand is limited, and every other GM cars has supply that outstrips demand. For once, I'd like to see GM take the honorable route.

Well, if more variants were produced on the current Kappa platform, and were not produced in the same scope as the Solstice/Sky, meaning they were not limited by volume or otherwise small market cars, than that would improve the business case for this platform, thereby pacifying our request for better volume because of the potential of a small RWD platform. So the answer is yea. It's the potential of what could come off of a small RWD platform, someone said above all the RWD variants that could come for Pontiac, and I have been saying this for YEARS, literally I was the first to call for this, you can ask anyone around here, YEARS, I have been asking for RWD cars for Pontiac, give me RWD G4, G6 wagons coupes verts sedans. The potential of what this platform could have been had they taken the time is what gets me.

Thanks for responding to my questions.

It would seem we are in greater agreement than would have been indicated by the earlier portions of this thread. We mostly differ on the methods and timing of how to reach the same goals.

I think KappaII will give us exactly the sort of platform (architecture) that you are calling for. Meantime, I have a feeling that we are yet to see the full array of models on the current Kappa.

I would advocate a Kappa coupe for SAAB and a Nomad-like Kappa for Chevy without any more roadsters. There are many difficulties in building a Nomad as seen in the concept , but I think a fair approximation could be done. A high performance coupe version of Solstice could be a viable option as well. I don't think we will see any true sedans until KappaII.

[evok]

There is nothing else planned for kappa on the books for stand alone models.

[Camino LS6]

There is nothing else planned for kappa on the books for stand alone models.

Well, that's really too bad. If we are going to see anyhting else (other than a Solstice coupe,perhaps) it would have to be "on the books" very soon.

The upside could be that KappaII might be here sooner. I could live with that.

[evok]

Well, that's really too bad. If we are going to see anyhting else (other than a Solstice coupe,perhaps) it would have to be "on the books" very soon.

The upside could be that KappaII might be here sooner. I could live with that.

In addition - there are no replacements on the books as far as I know to replace KappaIs.

[Mr.Krinkle]

arent there still a half dozen other projects underway?

also, this is supposed to be the year with the largest number of releases, 21 if i remember correctly. is this buying any time or just more thumb twiddling?

[Camino LS6]

In addition - there are no replacements on the books as far as I know to replace KappaIs.

KappaII may be a misnomer anyway, just an internet name for the "new,small RWD" architecture Lutz has said is being worked on. But, I take him at his word that it is coming.

[Mr.Krinkle]

kappa couldve probably been made more flexible, sure...but it would have cost a little bit extra and probably taken more time to do so.

the fact is it took more than 2 years from the original solstice concept and the auto journalists wondered if that would be too much time in between and lose steam by the time it debuted. it didnt.

i would imagine full size architecture takes longer to develop and hone to competetive levels. thats what is being worked on now.

the way business is being done is changing drastically. more cars, more competitors, less time between tweaks and freshening. i believe the general is updating its portfolio in order to be on that same plane.

these cars, to me anyway, seem like a tasty morsel to tide some people over while winning over others who may not think the talent in gm could produce cars like this.

the bottom line is they need to be more proactive instead of reactive. i think once all the old stuff cycles through the newer cars and trucks will be just that.

[evok]

KappaII may be a misnomer anyway, just an internet name for the "new,small RWD" architecture Lutz has said is being worked on. But, I take him at his word that it is coming.

I understood. Just want to clarify that there are no plans for a kappa replacement on the books or programs allocated to a small rwd architecture. The rwd small car speculation were begun because of a Fastlane blog asking questions.

What this means for timing is that if anything were to be given a go today, nothing will arrive into showroom for another 5 years or so.

[Trimnell1]

I understood.  Just want to clarify that there are no plans for a kappa replacement on the books or programs allocated to a small rwd architecture.  The rwd small car speculation were begun because of a Fastlane blog asking questions. 

What this means for timing is that if anything were to be given a go today, nothing will arrive into showroom for another 5 years or so.

evok: So if this proposed Kappa II still hasn't recieved an official go or funding from GM, then we are looking at MY 2012 at the earliest before there are any Solstice/Sky replacements or a new line of small RWD cars for Pontiac. I agree with the assessment that GM should have made Kappa I a hell lot more flexible, that way the next-gen Kappas could have followed an evolutionary path platform-wise like the Corvette C5/C6 or GMT-800/GMT-900 programs. Now, since Kappa isn't flexible at all and money is very tight, does GM spend big bucks to make an all-new small RWD platfrom to totally replace Kappa or do the Solstice/Sky die after their run? Not to mention that this makes the future of Pontiac even more bleak, just like what we talked about at our "other" site before it shut down.

I'll contact you soon so we can talk some more.

[Croc]

evok:  So if this proposed Kappa II still hasn't recieved an official go or funding from GM, then we are looking at MY 2012 at the earliest before there are any Solstice/Sky replacements or a new line of small RWD cars for Pontiac.  I agree with the assessment that GM should have made Kappa I a hell lot more flexible, that way the next-gen Kappas could have followed an evolutionary path platform-wise like the Corvette C5/C6 or GMT-800/GMT-900 programs.  Now, since Kappa isn't flexible at all and money is very tight, does GM spend big bucks to make an all-new small RWD platfrom to totally replace Kappa or do the Solstice/Sky die after their run?  Not to mention that this makes the future of Pontiac even more bleak, just like what we talked about at our "other" site before it shut down. 

I'll contact you soon so we can talk some more.

No, we are looking at 5 years from date of greenlighting. SKY/Solstice will likely have a long run so GM can get some profits out of this damn turkey of a platform.

[evok]

evok:  So if this proposed Kappa II still hasn't recieved an official go or funding from GM, then we are looking at MY 2012 at the earliest before there are any Solstice/Sky replacements or a new line of small RWD cars for Pontiac. 

I am speculating on timing to align with the replacement for the current kapps if replaced.

Also - it is possible there are some engineers and designers developing something on the CAD tube for future use. Some platform to have in the hip pocket when times call for it but, there are no programs that are scheduled to use a new small rwd platform.

Kappa II is just spculative and/or placeholder for the small rwd platform that was a focus of a Fastlane question to the public.

[Trimnell1]

Hmmm, that's good to know that maybe some designers and engineers are doing some advanced design work on a small RWD platform so that if GM officially green-lights this project, it will shave some significant time off the development. If I remember right, GM has a host of future upgrades to keep the Solstice/Sky fresh so they should stay modern and cutting edge until/if their replacements arrive.

On a related note, the June Motor Trend claims that the proposed Kappa Chevy Stingray is now dead but there is still a plan to install a 300hp HFV6 engine into the Kappa cars. Considering the source of this news, I take every future news story they have with a grain of salt, but if true then I wonder what will become of the 2.0L turbo if this 300hp V-6 presumably will go into the Solstice GXP and Sky Redline?

Edited April 26, 2006 by Trimnell1

[ZL-1]

On a related note, the June Motor Trend claims that the proposed Kappa Chevy Stingray is now dead but there is still a plan to install a 300hp HFV6 engine into the Kappa cars.  Considering the source of this news, I take every future news story they have with a grain of salt, but if true then I wonder what will become of the 2.0L turbo if this 300hp V-6  presumably will go into the Solstice GXP and Sky Redline?

I that info is true, I hope the car's dynamics aren't much affected by what I guess is a heavier engine...

[evok]

Hmmm, that's good to know that maybe some designers and engineers are doing some advanced design work on a small RWD platform so that if GM officially green-lights this project, it will shave some significant time off the development.  If I remember right, GM has a host of future upgrades to keep the Solstice/Sky fresh so they should stay modern and cutting edge until/if their replacements arrive. 

On a related note, the June Motor Trend claims that the proposed Kappa Chevy Stingray is now dead but there is still a plan to install a 300hp HFV6 engine into the Kappa cars.  Considering the source of this news, I take every future news story they have with a grain of salt, but if true then I wonder what will become of the 2.0L turbo if this 300hp V-6  presumably will go into the Solstice GXP and Sky Redline?

May, possible, could - I would not read to much into a my comments on rwd.

[Chazman]

"Kappa II" is nothing but a proposal now - and barely that. Those that are pushing for it, wanted it based off the current Kappa.....but the engineering simply does not exist to support such a proposal.

It will be many months, at the earliest, before anyone even figures out what a "Kappa II" would even consist of. This is anything but a firmed up program yet.