Drew Dowdell

BTW, Sigma cost $1 billion to develop and they got, what 4 cars out of it? 6 if you count the coupe and wagon variants separately? ATS will get sedan, coupe, and convertible. Camaro will be on it CTS will move to it (along with at least one of it's non-sedan body styles) Holden will get a copy or 3, Opel might if there is a wagon. Buick will get at least one 6 with a possible 6 more vehicles worldwide.

Cool as an Opel I mean.

As dwight said, better horsepower for Cadillac.

Ok class, let's do some math. Let's say that when equipped with the 4-cylinder turbo and automatic, the ATS is 3400 lbs. Sounds about right for a vehicle around 180 inches long, after all, that's the weight of the base 3-series. How did we get that number? The Camaro, which is generally considered to be a fat pig, is 190 inches and 3769 lbs. in automatic form. Saving 300lbs on a new platform designed to be 10 inches smaller and uses higher strength steel is child's play. But "The Camaro is a V6!" you say. Righto - Lets look at the weight difference between the 4-cylinder Malibu and V6 Malibu. A Malibu LT 4-cylinder is 3415 A Malibu LTZ 6-cylinder is 3649 Let's also assume there is extra weight on the LTZ coming from non-drivetrain parts. 50lbs So the Camaro could save 150 lbs. just by switching to a 4-cylinder. Leaving just 150lbs to find somewhere in the Zeta platform in order to hit the 3400lb weight target on a 10 inch shorter vehicle that uses higher strength alloys. Not even GM could screw that up. Let's work the other way round. Base ATS starts at 3400lbs... but there is no way the Camaro will get all of the equipment and sound deadening the Cadillac will. Having 2 fewer doors, less equipment, less sound deadening, can easily end up giving back 200lbs. So you're looking at a possible 3200lb Camaro (yes, powered by a 4-cylinder in base form... come to the year 2011 please). So you have an ATS at 3400lbs and a Camaro at 3200lbs. Lets start adding things back in: Turbo V6 for Camaro and ATS - add 250lbs to 3650 and 3450 respectively. The 335i is 3605lbs and the Mustang V6 base is 3453. Smallblock V8 for Camaro and ATS-V - add another 200lbs each to 3850 and 3650. The M3 is 3753 by increasing aluminum usage and the Mustang GT is 3605. Now - lets stretch the Alpha platform all the way up and over 5-series 193" size to 196 inches. Why that number? Well because even "heavy" Zeta can come in at 40lbs lighter than the 535i. The 196" Pontiac G8 GXP V8 weighed 4050lbs and the 2008 Cadillac STS V8 clocked in with 3995 lbs on Sigma. So GM can use either of it's two heaviest RWD platforms and literally ANY engine it produces save for the Duramax and still be lighter than a 3 inch shorter 2011 BMW 535i. Why am I worried about the smaller, lighter, Alpha platform weight again?

All it's gotta do is keep the look close enough to the current Durango and it'll do fine for that volume

Saw not 1 but 4 Rolls Royce Phantoms during my stay in Toronto.

Different type of car--driving dynamics aren't important. Is that why every rag out there tests mid-size family sedans by running them through a battery of tests and then picks the one with the best combination of handling and acceleration? I'm not saying that handling isn't important, but if Alpha is "near perfect" for a 3-series size vehicle, what are we upset about? Are we upset that if it is sized like the 5-series it won't handle like a 3-series? Well I've got news for you....neither does the 5-series. Just because the platform can be sized up doesn't mean the vehicle at the small end will be compromised. I disagree with the notion that the ability, by itself, to accept a V8 compromises the platform. The Audi S5, the Mercedes C-class, Lexus IS-F, and previous generation 3-series, are sitting there taunting that idea. People with limited funds have been putting the small block V8 into the Miata since there has been a Miata and their biggest concern is typically cooling or getting the rear wheels to stick. I'm sure GM can figure it out for a 3-series size sedan.

Given my experience with Honda AWD currently, I have no confidence in it's ability to be used when needed in towing situations.

Cool! If the actual ends up looking like that chop, it wouldn't be a bad thing!

Freightliner - Mercedes

I'm gonna get a link from a friend that might help.

mine goes to 11

Almost every FWD car at Toyota bigger than the Corolla is a Camry derivative. Camry, Venza, Sienna, Highlander, RX, Avalon - all related.

I think this is the key aspect of the platform that we should be focusing on. Zeta was remarkably flexible in this regard (although the attribute has so far been under-utilized). I expect Alpha to be even moreso. You have to think that some lessons have been learned. I remain optimistic about both Alpha and the Zeta II/Zeta light/Zeta-Sigma larger car platforms. I believe that GM ran into an issue with the flexibility of Zeta when they tried to start using it for things it wasn't originally intended for. Look at the amount of effort and changes just to get the Camaro we have today. But as you say, lessons (hopefully) have been learned for Alpha. Hence the requirements that it be able to accept 4, 6, and 8 cylinder engines.

Wonder how well GMC sells up here in Canadia... I'm seeing averts for $9500 in rebates $0 down and low financing.

See that 4 with a C around it? You want that number to be higher. Higher is faster. I think they go up to 8.

There is another new RWD platform looming out there for large cars. I don't know what it's based on originally, whether it is a derivative of Zeta, Sigma or just what..... but it's called Omega. It will debut with the Cadillac flagship over the XTS.

Malibu is moving to Fairfax with the next gen.

just pointing out, the avalanche still has freakishly good resale. I'm still disappointed I can't find one with the features I want with the price I want at any mileage.

and furthermore, wasn't the whole point of the alpha that GM had a nose module in different sizes, a body module in different sizes and a tail module in different sizes? Then they can swap the modules around for the different cars they need to build...

OMG I agreed with SMK on something.

The problem, as I see it, with this article is the assumption that all vehicles built on the Alpha have to compete with the 3-series. That isn't true. The Camaro would and should have a very different driving personality than the ATS. If Buick were to get an Alpha for.. oh I dunno.. a Riviera, that would have a much softer performance threshold than the first two I mentioned and yes would probably be 3700 lbs. And if Alpha can be scaled up to be CTS sized... then yes, I expect it to weigh to 4,000 lbs in fully loaded AWD format. Only one of the vehicles known to be on this platform has to compete with the 3-series and that is the ATS. It'll be in showrooms in about 12-14 months to make its case.... lets try to not bash it too much before we even see it.

depends on needs. For long distance cruising, any Cruze LT or higher. It's easily the quietest and most comfortable while being the best on gas <in the manual version and soon the automatic> If you need Malibu size for Cruze LS price... then the Jetta

it's on E now... going to fill up tomorrow before heading back to PIttsburgh and I'll be able to report.

I think I am softening my criticism of the 2.5. I just spent the evening zipping around Toronto and in these conditions it's got plenty of snot. It's when you try a passing maneuver on the highway where it runs out of breath (pretty much my entire drive up here was 99% highway) It's also big for a compact. It's gotta be old Passat sized.