GM puts brake on rear-drive vehicles


Published April 10, 2007


General Motors has put a hold on future rear-wheel-drive vehicles.

"We've pushed the pause button. It's no longer full speed ahead," Vice Chairman Bob Lutz revealed in an interview.

Two of the most important RWD cars in the works are the Chevy Camaro sports coupe due back late in 2008 and the full-size, RWD replacement for the Chevy Impala sedan for 2009. Both are expected to be huge sellers and contribute major profits to a GM till burdened with IOUs the last few years.

"It's too late to stop Camaro, but anything after that is questionable or on the bubble," said Lutz, noting that also means Camaro derivatives -- along with a big Impala sedan, "if we call it Impala."

The RWD cars, you see, would be larger and heavier than front-wheel-drive cars or are high-performance models.

So it comes down to the matter of fuel economy. Or as Lutz says: "We don't know how to get 30 percent better mileage from" RWD cars.

That 30 percent bogey arises from a proposal by the Bush administration to raise corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards by 4 percent a year so cars would have to average 34 m.p.g. by 2017, up from 27.5 m.p.g. today. On top of that, the Supreme Court ruled last week that the Environmental Protection Agency can regulate carbon dioxide expelled by cars, a gas that contributes to global warming. The EPA doesn't do so now.

"We'll decide on our rear-drive cars when the government decides on CO(-2) levels and CAFE regulations," Lutz said, adding that limiting CO(-2) would increase mileage, too.

"Carbon dioxide is a natural byproduct of burning gas and directly proportional to the amount of fuel burned. If we legislate CO(-2) from cars, why not legislate we take one less breath per minute since humans release capricious amounts of CO(-2) each time they exhale?" offered a testy Lutz.

Lutz also points out that higher mileage will come at a price, with the proposal to raise CAFE certain to increase costs by as much as $5,000, which will be added to a car's sticker, an amount most consumers won't be willing to pay. There are no hard numbers for how much CAFE compliance adds to the sticker now.

"Rather than buy new, people would hang onto their old cars. We could eat the $5,000, but that would put us out of business."

Besides, those who see cars as more than just an appliance are eager for the new RWD offerings.

Among other cars affected are a high-performance midsize Pontiac, a replacement for the full-size Buick Lucerne sedan, a compact smaller than the current CTS at Cadillac and possible 300-horsepower versions of the Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky roadsters.

"This is very disappointing," noted Erich Merkle, director of forecasting for IRN Inc., in Grand Rapids, Mich. Most of the cars coming are necessary to GM's turnaround as showroom magnets.

"What the public buys makes CAFE work, not what the industry builds," Merkle added. "To improve mileage you change demand, not supply, by raising gas prices through taxes. But no politician is going to do that so they throw the responsibility on the back of the industry."

Lutz also objects to the talk that carmakers can easily raise mileage with a very low investment.

"Academics assure us that for $200 we can get 30 percent better mileage. If anyone can figure out how to do that for $200 -- or even for $1,000 -- I want them in my office today. Show me how to do it and we'll adopt it," he said. "If I could increase mileage by 30 percent for $200, why wouldn't I? What's my motivation not to when a gas-electric hybrid gets 27 percent better mileage and I hope someday to get the cost down to $9,000?"

Others insist that carmakers simply have to sell more small cars, such as the trio of 1-liter concepts that promise 40 m.p.g.-plus that GM unveiled at the New York Auto Show.

"Small-car mileage only counts toward CAFE if you build them here, and you can't build small cars here at a profit," Lutz said, explaining that foreign-made cars would count toward the automaker's import fleet, and its domestic fleet is where GM needs help.

Very disturbing.

But it might simply be a slick political move on Bob's part. Threaten to shutter ALL domestic production except for trucks (my words, not his) so that you do an end run around CAFE. Isn't it time for a mass uprising among true car afficiandos against the mass-market egg-shaped econoboxes that the government wants to shove down our throats? Yes, I want 362 hp in a rwd (or pipedream awd) family car that meets or exceeds the all-over 23-25 mpg I get from a 500# lighter over 100hp less current ride. Funny thing is that the imports seem to be able to achieve both, power and economy - but at a $10,000 price premium (looking at the equivalent Audi, BMW, Infinity, LExus. I know none of those are considered the G8's competition, yet thoise are the cars that perform as this one does, albeit with V6 or sometimes smaller power.

However, web-etiquette and copyright mandates creditting all cited sources and I have been through 5 pages of Bob Lutz related interviews and nothing as current as what you quoted. Can you please provide the source and link?

Man, what a sad state of affairs.

today's chicago tribune...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/columnists/chi-0704090401apr10,0,7049242.column?coll=chi-business-hed

Thanks, 3.

I still hope it is mostly posturing as without the "magnet" cars GM might as well sell to Kerkorian along with Chrysler; but that's another story.

Key word there is "in the works". The G8 is (presumably) in production, ahead of the Camaro. It does sound like the death knell for a future GTO though.

I would be very suprised to see this go through in it's fullest sense. People make such a big fuss about how the automakers don't do enough to raise their fuel economy standards, but why should they? It doesn't make fiscal sense unless they have to. And who is it that really doesn't want better fuel economy? The gas companies, and they're the ones with all the money and all the lobbyists in the government to help keep the fuel economy standard low, because that is so much better for their business. Like Lutz said, it's not that automakers can't raise their fuel economy - they just can't do it cheaply.

So I think, in this one very small sense, the gas comanies and all their money and resources will be good for the auto industry.

Say it ain't so!!

Camaro and G8 are probably ok as they are officially and publicly approved for production and not far off.

but rwd impala and others are probably more affected...

then again it could just be a bit of smoke and mirrors

Camaro and G8 are probably ok as they are officially and publicly approved for production and not far off.

but rwd impala and others are probably more affected...

then again it could just be a bit of smoke and mirrors

The problem with smoke & mirror tricks is this. People hear news like that & make the decision to buy something else. Perhaps Toyota's biggest sales gimmick is not to promise what they can't deliver. Plus, the G8 & Camaro are still on for production & sales.

Say it ain't so!!I'm with you, if they don't produce the G8, I may go off the deep end! :cursin:

This proposition has bi-partisan support so a good chance it will pass but how soon? Aussie-made G8 would be lumped into the same average with the Aveo, Astra and others with higher MPG than a typical domestic-made vehicle. Canadian-made vehicles fall under NAFTA so I assume that's why the talk of killing off GMNA production of Impala, other Zeta's, Alpha-based Pontiacs, etc. Even if this legislation was passed overnight, the Aussie-built G8 would comply with requirements for a scheduled (2-year?) run so can't see a reason why it would be cancelled. We should be very happy GM added AFM to it...

But that presumably means no Canadian made G8 or GTO and possibly a scaled-back Camaro? Worse than that, it was hoped to take Pontiac all RWD? That plan will be killed probably making Pontiac, as a brand, redundant. Pontiac could be turned into a "hot hatch" division but that's Saturn's territory.

I think a lot of what Lutz said was sensational but not altogether inaccurate. He stated increasing avg. MPG 4% each year for 10 years will add up to $5000 to the cost of each vehicle. I assume he didn't mean all at once but distributed over that time frame and that added cost would be to meet improved MPG requirements while maintaining current horsepower/torque. It wouldn't take any technological hurdle to simply cut power across the board. Vehicle prices are going up about 2% annually as is, maybe higher with tax? Net result is Americans will have to keep vehicles longer and manufacturing will continue to move out of NAFTA territory to stay competitive, further exacerbating job loss. Some claim increasing fuel economy as proposed will create jobs but I don't see how? Technology sector? Those jobs will be outsourced.

The push for energy conservation/independence is only going to increase with an administration change. This might just be the opening salvo.

My opinion (without empirical data) is that given two cars of idential outward dimensions and underhood hp and tranny type, that a fwd layout may only save in th elow-low hundreds of #s over a rwd. What is added for rwd? A longer driveshaft and lightweight rear diff. You still have full-size wheelas and brakes all the way around. fwd, transverse engines ALLOW for engineering a more compact vehicle, but do not necesarily mean it must be. Compare the last large fwd Pontiac, the Bonneville, in size to the G8 and they are similar. SO the argument that rwd means a larger vehicle is rubbish. Sure the G8 is heavier, but that weight is in a safer crash-surviving shell, not heavier because of the drivetrain. The real culprit is ou insatiable thirst for more power. If the G8/Impala/Lucerne came only with a slightly enhanced version of teh current GXP's 303hp V8, it still would be more car than what the GP currently is. BUt drawing 362 out of a 6 liter and expecting over 400 down the road is asking for gas guzzler tax at some point, not a good move for family transportation.

I don't think the G8 will be affected in the short term because it is being built in Australia. Therefore it should get lumped in with all the small cars GM imports from overseas, the Saturn/Opels and the Aveos, which have fairly decent MPG.

The problem is, as Lutz said, that the government is placing the burden on manufacturers. GM and Ford have said they can't do it cheaply and that the consumer would have to pay the relatively higher price tag. Which means less cars would get sold. So to stay in business, which is hard enough as it is, the manufacturers would have to ship all manufacturing overseas to build the cars cheaper and ship them back to eventually be sold. It would be so much easier to raise the gas tax, very unpopular among politicians, and force the consumer to make a rational decision as to what they really should be driving. Which is much better than forcing them to drive econoboxes. It would also push some people to use public transportation, or car pool. It would also allow manufacturing and the hundreds of thousands of jobs associated with it to stay in America. You would also be "fixing the problem" right now as opposed to a few years from now. People driving used/older cars will be affected right away if you raised the gas tax, but not for several years by changing CAFE. With CAFE you have to wait for the trickle down effect and the older cars to be junked before you get some consumers to even think about buying one of the newer slightly more fuel efficient but significantly more expensive cars. With raising the gas tax everyone is affected right now, and decisions have to be made in the short term. But that still allows for people to buy whatever they want, and pay for it at the pump if they are willing to do so. CAFE as a concept and in practice seems like a Rube Goldberg.

If they dont make the G8 after all of this, I'm never buying another GM vehicle again. If they cant figure it out , then they dont deserve to be in buisness.

Domestic auto manufacturers need to get a clue. I believe there are more than a few buyers out there (like me) that would like to buy American :us_flag: but don't because of the (for the most part) poor quality and offerings. I wanted a RWD sport sedan with a 6MT. Prior to the G8, only the CTS filled the bill but I won't buy one because even in the 6MT the CTS has a foot parking brake...and they didn't even correct it in the 2008 redesign! Are they nuts? So if they don't build the G8...they will lose me...likely forever.

It's too late to scrap production on the G8. There is already too much time and money in on it.

It's just political posturing. Nothing else.

Domestic auto manufacturers need to get a clue. I believe there are more than a few buyers out there (like me) that would like to buy American :us_flag: but don't because of the (for the most part) poor quality and offerings. I wanted a RWD sport sedan with a 6MT. Prior to the G8, only the CTS filled the bill but I won't buy one because even in the 6MT the CTS has a foot parking brake...and they didn't even correct it in the 2008 redesign! Are they nuts? So if they don't build the G8...they will lose me...likely forever.

I think you would be suprised at where "poor quality" really lies. The US automakers have topped, or done extraordinarily well in JD Power tests in the recent years.

Now, "percieved" quality is a whole other topic. Thanks to the media, everyone already has [biased] decisions made for them.

I think you would be suprised at where "poor quality" really lies. The US automakers have topped, or done extraordinarily well in JD Power tests in the recent years.

Now, "percieved" quality is a whole other topic. Thanks to the media, everyone already has [biased] decisions made for them.

I agree. It is almost all in the perception of quality or lack thereof. GM is among the best. Late 70s-mid 80s, maybe not so hot, but they have made great strides since then and can truly compete on the world stage.

I agree. It is almost all in the perception of quality or lack thereof. GM is among the best. Late 70s-mid 80s, maybe not so hot, but they have made great strides since then and can truly compete on the world stage.It depends on if you are referring to quality in a reliability sense or a expesiveness of the materials sense. The area where GM and Ford still lag behind in is the fit and finish of the products.

Couple of interesting quotes from Car and Driver (http://www.caranddriver.com/dailyautoinsider/12810/lutz-on-zeta-future-camaro-safe-but-impala-work-stalls.html):

"The Pontiac G8 and Chevy Camaro are still a go—barely—but uncertainty over possible strict new fuel-economy regulations has jeopardized plans for a rear-wheel-drive Chevy Impala and other vehicles from this architecture."

"The Monte Carlo will not migrate to Zeta", Lutz said. “We won’t do a rear-wheel-drive coupe."

ergo... no GTO replacement. Camaro is it.

...The other casualty is a second platform, the Global Small RWD Architecture that is in its infancy.

Lutz said GM had begun design and engineering work on the Global Small RWD Architecture at a U.S. design studio, for undisclosed brands.

We can surmise Pontiac was one of those...

The G8 is not dead. Pontiac took the GTO off their website and replaced it with the G8. They would not do this if there was the possibility of no G8.

http://www.pontiac.com/

http://www.g8board.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=66&stc=1&d=1176361625

They took the GTO off because the last model year for it was 2006. We are now approaching m.y. 2008 with 2007 firmly entrenched.

They took the GTO off because the last model year for it was 2006. We are now approaching m.y. 2008 with 2007 firmly entrenched.

I understand that, my point was that they added the G8. Additionally, note the (early 2008) next to it.

The G8 is not dead.

"There's no hold on the G8," said Hopson. "G8 production starts in October and the first units will be available after the first of the year."

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=120407

Just take a deep breath everyone. IMHO, their will still be more RWD cars built off the Zeta platform. GM has put way too much money into it. Besides, I was always a little uneasy about having so many cars built off Zeta. If too many are built off it, the value of the G8 heads south.

The G8 will be built in Oz through 09 and imported to the US. When the plant in Canada is done being retooled for the Camaro to be built there the G8 will follow. Like the Camaro its to late for GM to turn back on this one. The G8 is safe through 2010.

...The other casualty is a second platform, the Global Small RWD Architecture that is in its infancy.

This is one of those moments that GM could have their cake & eat it too. If the design of the Global RWD platform was done very well, they can make it a great riding, great handling, & low weight (compared to their current cars) models. But, GM is scared. There, I said it. They are scared to risk any of their car ideas. But, they'll try to feed us all of the trucks they can think of, risky or not. Example: The Chevy Avalanche. Pretty radical compared to the Suburban that it shared it's chassis with. The '07 redesign: looks like the Suburban. Seems like GM is willing to try the right stuff at the wrong time. :cursin:

The G8 will be built in Oz through 09 and imported to the US. When the plant in Canada is done being retooled for the Camaro to be built there the G8 will follow. Like the Camaro its to late for GM to turn back on this one. The G8 is safe through 2010.

That's contrary to what caranddriver.com quoted about a mid-sized Pontiac replacement? I just assumed they meant a Canadian-made G8 would be axed because they were lumping that into the same context as Impala and we now know current G8 isn't affected. Maybe they got their wires crossed.

Much hinges on what happens to CAFE. If credits for flex-fuel vehicles are maintained, then RWD V8's could be saved since GM wants to make most of its vehicles dual fuel capable or hybrid. Environmentalists would like to eliminate flex-fuel credits as they label them a crutch for automakers (namely GM and Ford). Flex-fuel vehicle credits really have been a saving grace and, if cut, will significantly drop the General's fleet MPG average. That would force GM to make a big vehicle down-size in short order.

Also, there is talk of discounting mild hybrids for credits as they aren't considered efficient enough to be "real" hybrids. The entrenched oil infrastructure and oil-lackey politicians are who environmentalists should be targeting but it is domestic automakers that will take the biggest hit from more stringent regulations.

Oil companies own most of the nation's gas stations and any kind of alternate fuel represents competition, so of course they are resistant to installing bio-fuel pumps. Nothing short of nationalizing the pumps will change that. No, we don't have enough farmland to support the entire country's fuel needs but with continuing advances in cellulosic ethanol production we may overcome that. Not to be political but, if the countless billions of dollars we have spent invading the middle east would have been applied instead to fund alternative energy research, we could have been well on our way to oil independence by now.

The G8 was, I assume, targeted at competition with the Charger and 300, however if Chrysler is filleted by a private equity group, what will be the point of big RWD vehicles? Ford is supposed to come out with a RWD Mustang based sedan but they are fading so fast they might not be able to get it into production. It would be a huge waste to discontinue Zeta *again* after Camaro but what if gas goes up to $4 a gallon? Nobody will buy big Zetas anyway. We are one Katrina away from those prices. Lots of uncertainties.

Just take a deep breath everyone. IMHO, their will still be more RWD cars built off the Zeta platform. GM has put way too much money into it. Besides, I was always a little uneasy about having so many cars built off Zeta. If too many are built off it, the value of the G8 heads south.


I agree - the G8 has never been in danger of getting the axe. Even if this standard is passed, everyone in the market will have to meet it, so everyones prices will go up. It would be foolish for GM not to produce a RWD line.

It may just be taht the G8 becomes the only large rwd from GM other than Cadillac and trucks. And if they continue to import it well beyond 2010 then it does not affect the domestic CAFE fleet which is in the most jeopardy. SOas long as not 100% of G8s are sold with the V8 at 16.45 mpg and at least some ar esold with the V6 at 20.63 mpg (based solely on convertining officila GM metric consumption figures for this car), th eonly question is how do those numbers compare to the EPA figures we are used to, and how do they relate to teh new downgraded numbers for 2008?

GM should use whatever method Toyota uses to claim 60 mpg in the Prius. Since nearly everything I read claims actual MPG to be 35-48mpg, not 60 MPG, lets just say the G8 gets 30 mpg and be done with it.

GM should use whatever method Toyota uses to claim 60 mpg in the Prius. Since nearly everything I read claims actual MPG to be 35-48mpg, not 60 MPG, lets just say the G8 gets 30 mpg and be done with it.

The new method would claim the Prius at 42mpg.

No the G8 was never dead, but I think that a G8 GXP might be.

GM should use whatever method Toyota uses to claim 60 mpg in the Prius. Since nearly everything I read claims actual MPG to be 35-48mpg, not 60 MPG, lets just say the G8 gets 30 mpg and be done with it.

John you are such a wise man.

P.S. I saw your GTP is way into the 13's, Awesome! I so miss my Comp G...
That's why I'm dying until the G8 comes out. I'm getting BLACK again, of course.

* Also, we had a daughter "Addison" on Friday 1/26/2007 she is so cute & awesome......


- Mike - :burnout:

John you are such a wise man.

P.S. I saw your GTP is way into the 13's, Awesome! I so miss my Comp G...
That's why I'm dying until the G8 comes out. I'm getting BLACK again, of course.

* Also, we had a daughter "Addison" on Friday 1/26/2007 she is so cute & awesome......


- Mike - :burnout:

Enjoy her, as once she hits the teenage years you have about 10 years until they start acting like adults and are then a joy to again be with. Been there, done that. And it is worth it to see a daughter turn into the image of yoru wife, and for her to be happy in it.

OT - Mike P, congrats, may God bless and protect her :)

* Also, we had a daughter "Addison" on Friday 1/26/2007 she is so cute & awesome......

Congrats! Now you get the car seat mod....