zetaman

that was easy... it's all downhill

sloppy work...high enviro creditials is highly valued and shouldn't be messed with. could damage the brand if you're not careful. mind you, i did see this promotion some time back. There hasn't been any saab promotion for quite some time.

GM's impact in Australia is through Holden - without Holden there really isn't much to GM down here. Holden is the hero brand and for the sake of the local GM operation it should be protected - diluting Holden by introducing Chevrolet serves no one well. Chevrolet is the everyman brand in the US... in Australia it means nothing. It would make no sense for Holden (GM) to introduce another brand to Australia. While Holden still exists in Australia as a part of GM the Volt can only be a Holden.

Age of the architecture has little to do with it. Your beloved Sigma (co-developed by Holden) is even older, what's your point?

All of that is true.. to a point. I wouldn't write off getting the Coupe60 produced just yet. The last Monaro started life exactly the same way as did the soon-to-be-released Camaro - design studies/show cars. Huge public reaction motivated the decision to build. Coupe60 has elicited a phenomenal reaction here - enormous crowds and palpable excitement around the stand (and not just the Holden fans). Like the last Monaro, this is a car that transcends brand loyalty. Punters are alreading trying to place deposits at Holden dealers. The decision may be forced on Holden due to capacity issues but I doubt they couldn't make a business case - the advantage of zeta architecture is the flexibility inherent in it's design that permits multiple configurations with minimal investment. It's a cheaper car to modify than even the previous platform - and that was made into many versions (sedan, coupe, 2dr ute, 4dr ute, 4wd, lwb, suv). Holden's been sitting on this car for some time - since the Monaro/GTO project got canned a few years back, and they've been waiting for the chance to show it off. I bet the plan is to use the huge public response Holden knew would come in order to support the business case - Holden wants to build this car.

Holden apparently developed Monaro/GTO to rolling prototype prior to getting nixed by GMNA. This could just be a modified version of the prototype used for the birthday celebration but still without plans for production. My not-so-secret desire is to see this get the go ahead... Unfortunately, GM excels at managing expectations - it usually ***ps all over them

Wow... Is that right? A V6 only sportwagon is a bit of a misnomer and a V8-only Ute really limits the potential, unecessarily. A buyer could get very frustrated by the limited choices. It's a bit like the carrot and the stick approach - dangle the carrot to draw the in customer by offering variety of body styles, and then whack them with a stick by telling them they can't get what they want. You may be correct regarding the wagon - it wouldn't be the first time GMNA has backflipped over a zeta no-go decision. I've never considered a wagon before but I'm really looking forward to the Commodore Sportwagon - if it comes in a diesel I think I'm in.

Shameless scaremongering, PCS!! Really, that’s almost beneath you :AH-HA_wink: Btw, your sig: TICK-TOCK! Don't forget GM is a business, it's not here for anyone's personal self gratification! is a little odd. Aside from the fairly obvious pleonasm don't you think good business fulfills a need and makes the customer feel gratified? Shouldn't that be GM's mission? A user on another site, MonaroSS, has produced a few chops of how a Crewman might look – def worth a look MonaroSS Crewman renderings

Some of you guys have got a thin grasp of reality and some of you are just making stuff up. 1) VE (or zeta) is not a pig, even when compared to smaller cars 2008 Cadillac CTS curb mass = 3,872 (V6 automatic). It's a full size smaller than G8. 2008 CTS: Length / Width / Height: 191.6 in / 72.5 in / 58 in G8 GT curb mass = 3,995 (V8 auto) G8: Length / Width / Height: 4982 mm (196.1 in) / 1899 mm (74.8 in) / 1465 mm (57.7 in) So there seems little advantage in weight-saving by expanding Sigma into larger models. 2) Zeta was never delayed Holden was developing zeta independant of GMNA and their endless indecision. Holden never stopped development of VE 3) It's unlikely Alpha will be designed for V8. In order to make Alpha lightweight it's being designed for I4s and V6s without the required added weight being engineering for the high torque outputs of V8s. It's not in any way intended as the zeta replacement. 4) VE (the original zeta) has a 6 year lifecycle after which the replacement will likely continue on a modified zeta - Zeta is not heading to trucks

mmmeeeeooowwwww! puuuuuurrrrrrr....puuuuuuuurrrrrr..... :AH-HA_wink:

Thanks for the link, Camino, I feel a little more confident knowing more of Reuss' experience. If Reuss is really a "car guy" rather than an accountant (no offense, PCS :AH-HA_wink: ) then it could indeed be good for Holden. Car guys have been good to Holden - Peter Hanenberger was Chairman & MD (and a GM Group VP) until 2004, and is largely credited with the development of VE as well as radically overhauling the manufacturing capacity and processes. With his performance background, maybe Reuss is a good fit - No doubt we'll soon see.

A single direction? While I agree that GM needs better focus I believe the unintentional consequence of being a fractured organisiation is that GM does niche models better than anyone else - Great cars like CTS, Corvette, VE, most of the Opels and soon the Volt. Toyota does "single direction" really well but look at the product.... in the most part homogenised appliances without much soul but appealling to the masses. Hopefully GM doesn't lose sight of their strengths, and then learn how to capitalise on these strengths.

Thanks for the additional info too. My concern, as previously stated, is simply that this is a reflection of Holden being drawn into the GLobal business. Holden is no longer a small GM subsidiary, quite different to the rest of the GM group (producing a single large architecture for local consumption) and the decision to continue or discontinue platforms/facilities is no longer really their own. Not so long ago Holden was pretty much left to it's own devices so long as it remained a viable operation. Or alternatively, maybe this really means nothing at all ....who knows

True, I suppose. But neither my post, or PCS glee will affect the reality one way or another - no matter how influential he claims to be... :AH-HA_wink:

Perhaps that's true but 6 months is a very short stint in any role. My greatest concern is the dual role - VP GMAP & MD Holden. PCS, as you well know Holden values it's isolation from the rest of the GM group as a sense of "autonomy". Being a forgotten outpost had it's upsides. Reuss' dual role in AP will dilute that sense of isolation and since his responsibility extends to the region, decisions to cut models or move production facilities will be made to ensure Regional performance, and not solely at the national level. For example, if there's a business case to save money by moving Holden production off-shore it's easier to make that decision at the Regional level rather than at the national level. Reuss' dual role creates a conflict. In any case, I think it's fair to say that Holden is now well and truly drawn into the great pillowy bossom of mother GM.