Zeta News 2.0: New VF Commodore and Chevrolet SS

[Adamgp]

The nose piece was most likely removed for the engine transplant. Probably wasn't fully aligned when the photo was taken.

 

[Paulie]

Originally Quoted by Autoblog

Bob Lutz is back, and after what seems like five minutes into his job as GM's new marketing kingpin, he's doing what he does best: making headlines. Rest assured that this is a good thing, as El Generalissimo Roberto Maximo told Automobile Magazine that yes, the Pontiac G8 will live on in the United States as the Chevy Caprice. So much for Fritz "I'm not a fan of rebadging" Henderson's statement to the contrary a couple of weeks ago.

"The last time we looked at [the G8], we decided that we would continue to import it as a Chevrolet. It is kind of too good to waste," Lutz told the mag. As for the G8 being "too good to waste": Amen to that, Bob. This also makes us wonder if law enforcement-grade models will be part of the deal with Holden to continue production. Chevy Caprice police cars? That's got a very familiar ring to it. The next question is whether a U.S. Caprice would mimic the Middle East-market Caprice, which is based on the long-wheelbase Holden Caprice/Statesman, or whether it will simply be a Chevy-badged version of the standard-wheelbase Holden Commodore/Pontiac G8/Chevrolet Lumina. Frankly, as long as there's ultimately a Caprice SS that is identical to the Pontiac G8 GXP in every critical way, we don't care.

In his conversation with Automobile, Lutz also essentially confirms that next year's Cadillac CTS coupe will be joined by a V-series variant, saying that the CTS-V coupe was the car that had most of the Presidential Task Force members' tongues wagging during the product-pipeline tour they were given by GM. Lutz even hints that a CTS-V wagon is not completely out of the question. (We'll take the wagon in brown, with the stick, Bob.)

On the bad news side, in a separate blog post, Automobile reports that Lutz kind of throws dirt on the idea of an LSA-powered Camaro Z28 (though he doesn't specifically state that the program's toast). He says that for "mainstream" sports models like the Camaro, powerful sixes (like the one in the Camaro LS and LT) and turbo fours (like the one used in the now-dead Cobalt SS, HHR SS and Solstice GXP) are more indicitive of the automaker's future direction in that regard. Hmmm. Well then, how about bolting a blower to the direct-injected V6?

Welcome back, Bob. This sounds like it could get pretty fun.

Yay.

 

[Joey D]

Why are they keeping it named the Caprice? That is not a good image for the car considering that they were all either bought by municipalities for police cruisers, cab companies, or old people.

I mean look at this:

It needs to be named something different, or even just called the Impala and replace the car we have now. Which brings me to the next point, I assume they are dumping the Impala for the Caprice, it they aren't then it's still the same bone headed GM putting to many models on the market.

Also I'm not really sure if the Caprice is a good idea, the G8 was a failure, I can't really see how replacing a Pontiac grille with a Chevy one is really going to change people's perception of the car. And actually I would encourage American's not to buy this car, since effectively the money is going to Australia. The American people paid a ton of money to "save" GM's mismanaged mess, and they show their love through a car designed and built in Australia? Really if GM wants a new mid-size car, show the America people you still care by designing and building something here in the states, preferably Michigan, which apparently GM has abandoned.

 

[McLaren]

I personally think they should have called it the Lumina. At least the 2009 Lumina is a lot closer to the G8 than the Caprice.

 

[Joey D]

I personally think they should have called it the Lumina. At least the 2009 Lumina is a lot closer to the G8 than the Caprice.

Ya, except when you here Lumina what do you think of? Those broken down rust bucket first gen ones we got back in the early 90's.

There is just so much stigma attached with certain names that it really could make or break a car. I don't understand why they just can't come up with a new name altogether, oh wait I know why, that would kill an automotive company to be original rather then either just redesigning something old a, like the Cooper I own, or just rebadging something an old name, like the Dodge Charger.

 

[McLaren]

Eh, all I know is that if Dodge can bring back the Charger as a 4-door (badass to mediocre), then GM can definitely bring back the Caprice/Lumina from rust bucket to modern muscle machine.

 

[Joey D]

I really hope so or there is just a bunch of our tax dollars flying out the window. GM needs a winner now more than ever or they are just going to prove to the American people that they don't care. I just hope they don't raise the price, $25k for a starting price on the G8 wasn't unreasonable but really any more than that and they would be getting dangerously close to going up against entry level luxury cars.

 

[Paulie]

It's not Australia's fault if Americans are more about believing in false stereotypes of a vehicle name rather than appreciating a good car............wait a second, more than 50% of Australians are dumb enough to believe in automotive stereotypes over facts as well.

@ Joey, you can't tell anyone not buy this car when you yourself bought a Mini, that would be hypocritical attitude at its finest. Obviously GM is getting money from selling this car anyway, you'd be foolish to think that all the profit goes straight to Australia.

 

[Omnis]

Actually, the G8 is GM's only desirable car that fills the need for a large sedan. Even if it leaves a modest amount to be desired.

 

[Joey D]

@ Joey, you can't tell anyone not buy this car when you yourself bought a Mini, that would be hypocritical attitude at its finest. Obviously GM is getting money from selling this car anyway, you'd be foolish to think that all the profit goes straight to Australia.

What does me owning a MINI have to do with anything? There is nothing hypocritical in my state what so ever, go back and read it again. I'm merely saying that the American people "gave" GM a ton of money and they go ahead and continue building cars in countries that aren't America. Sure profits go to GM globally but if they are investing those profits in Australia that isn't doing much to help pay back the tax dollar I spent now is it? Nor is it helping the unemployment issue GM helped create.

I tried to be supportive of GM's bailout, but I just can't be anymore, I guess I finally saw the light you could say. Re-badging a car from Europe or Australia isn't helping out the problems in America, which is a bunch of crap considering we doled out a ton of money.

With that said the US government, via the American citizens, didn't give a dime to BMW so they have zero obligation to build cars in America or help out American citizens.

 

[Paulie]

It's probably worth noting that the new Chevy will almost 100% have improvements over the G8. With an update slated for Commodore in September (could include things like direct injection, better transmissions, maybe even eventually weight reduction) it's almost certain that will carry over to the later arriving Chevrolet.

What does me owning a MINI have to do with anything? There is nothing hypocritical in my state what so ever, go back and read it again. I'm merely saying that the American people "gave" GM a ton of money and they go ahead and continue building cars in countries that aren't America. Sure profits go to GM globally but if they are investing those profits in Australia that isn't doing much to help pay back the tax dollar I spent now is it? Nor is it helping the unemployment issue GM helped create.

I tried to be supportive of GM's bailout, but I just can't be anymore, I guess I finally saw the light you could say. Re-badging a car from Europe or Australia isn't helping out the problems in America, which is a bunch of crap considering we doled out a ton of money.

With that said the US government, via the American citizens, didn't give a dime to BMW so they have zero obligation to build cars in America or help out American citizens.

Not doing much as opposed to not doing anything by buying a Mini, there is a difference. Like I said, hypocritical. "Oh I don't want to buy a car from GM because it's not American, I'll buy a Mini instead". Forget it, I'm sick of reading your anti-American biased comments, say hello to my ignore list.

 

[McLaren]

Not doing much as opposed to not doing anything by buying a Mini, there is a difference. Like I said, hypocritical. Forget it, I'm sick of reading your anti-American biased comments, say hello to my ignore list.

Oh god. You're one of those, "Support America By Buying American Cars" people.

Get real, dude.

 

[Joey D]

Not doing much as opposed to not doing anything by buying a Mini, there is a difference. Like I said, hypocritical. Forget it, I'm sick of reading your anti-American biased comments, say hello to my ignore list.

I still fail to see how there is a difference? If I would have said that all American should only buy GM, Ford and Chrysler products, which is a common attitude in domestic friendly Detroit, then yes I would be a hypocrite for buying a MINI. However, that is not what I'm advocating, people should be allowed to buy whatever they wish since America is after all a free country.

Perhaps I should have been clearer. Americans who wish to support GM should only buy GM vehicles engineered and build in America because a message needs to be sent to them that we aren't giving you money to invest in other countries. We are giving you money to invest in this country. And I think I've done more than enough for GM because a fraction of my weekly pay cheque went to them.

I fail to see how my comments were anti-American also, if anything they were pro-American as I wish to see jobs returned here. Although I don't think anything is made here any more. Like I said, America is a free (or free-ish) country and we are supposed to have a capitalist economy. You should be allowed to buy what you want.

**And the reason I did not buy another GM car is because the Blazer was an awful vehicle. Why would I buy a product from a company that sold me junk the first time around? Bite me once, shame on you, bite me twice, shame on me.

Oh god. You're one of those, "Support America By Buying American Cars" people.

Get real, dude.

What I'll never understand is why people think just because it has a bowtie on the grille it some how means it's helping the USA. A lot of GM cars are built in Canada and Mexico, not to mention the re-badged Holden's, Daewoo's, and Opel's/Vauxhall's. Really if I wanted to buy American I should buy a Honda Accord since they are built in Ohio.

 

[Paulie]

Oh god. You're one of those, "Support America By Buying American Cars" people.

Get real, dude.

No, I'm one of those "Don't be a hypocrite" people, get over yourself dude.

 

[McLaren]

What I'll never understand is why people think just because it has a bowtie on the grille it some how means it's helping the USA. A lot of GM cars are built in Canada and Mexico, not to mention the re-badged Holden's, Daewoo's, and Opel's/Vauxhall's. Really if I wanted to buy American I should buy a Honda Accord since they are built in Ohio.

Your last sentence says it all. 👍

In this day & age, the only way to truly "support" America by buying cars is by buying cars only built in the US.

 

[McLaren]

No, I'm one of those "Don't be a hypocrite" people, get over yourself dude.

How is he a hypocrite when he's right?

Joey & I, along with every other American, gave our money to GM to keep them out of the trash bin. It doesn't do us any good when they use that money invest in cars that are built elsewhere.

In short terms, why should I buy a Pontiac G8 to support my country when in reality, that money just goes back to your country to support your people? Why should my money be taken & invested so that I be persuaded to support another country?

Should have edited....If a mod can merge, that would be appreciated.

 

[Paulie]

How is he a hypocrite when he's right?

Joey & I, along with every other American, gave our money to GM to keep them out of the trash bin. It doesn't do us any good when they use that money invest in cars that are built elsewhere.

In short terms, why should I buy a Pontiac G8 to support my country when in reality, that money just goes back to your country to support your people? Why should my money be taken & invested so that I be persuaded to support another country?

Should have edited....If a mod can merge, that would be appreciated.

So if you REALLY feel THAT way then buy American, you can't say that's the way you feel when you bought a Mini, because that'd be hypocritical, which is what Joey did. Of course, I'm not saying you HAVE to support your country either, that's up to you, and I couldn't care less, everyone in the world are humans just the same trying to make a life for themselves.

The reason I want GM to do well is not just because they own an Australian company, but because GM make cars I like at an affordable price for average blokes.

 

[Omnis]

Someone call Thomas Jefferson. It's getting protectionist up in here.

 

[YSSMAN]

Okay, okay... Lets have some more serious talk about the thing instead of making it personal...


RE: Having a Big, RWD Chevrolet Sedan (While Losing the Z/28?)

In all honesty, this is probably the way it should have been from the start. With a Chevrolet badge, they stand to sell more of the cars, it would have been a smaller initial investment, and ultimately it would fit well into a Cobalt - Camaro - Corvette family. We've already seen that minor updates to the G8 can substantially improve it, and since the car will be shipping with the more fuel-efficient 3.0L V6 and six-speed automatic combo, the CAFE standards won't be effected all that much. The sweet spot will ultimately be the SS model, using the same 400+ BHP setup from the G8 GXP that is arguably the best car that GM produces right now. Assuming that the pricing slides down just a hair bit (it is a Chevrolet after all), it will be an absolutely amazing value in any trim. GM is looking to find a full-size sedan to split the difference between the Malibu and CTS, I believe, and the "Caprice" would fit the bill.

As for losing the Z/28 because of it, I think its a sacrifice I'm willing to make. Having the admittedly small number of sales that would happen with a special Camaro just doesn't seem worth it in the face of the possibilities of a Caprice. Although, I have to wonder if this is a recent decision, as after all, the Camaro team seemed to be pretty gung-ho on having their Z/28 ready by 2011. I guess I'd look at it this way... While I love the Camaro to pieces, and while I'd love to see a 500 BHP version out on the streets... I'd much rather have a 400 BHP Chevrolet sedan with a stick.

RE: Caprice vs Lumina vs Impala

Of the three, I believe Impala is going to hold the greatest amount of weight with the "average" American, as it is one of Chevrolet's longest-lived models, and of course, something that is floating around right now. Problem is that the current car is old, I believe riding on the oldest continually used platform in any portfolio at the moment. The FWD Impala, last I had heard, will be continuing on until 2013 without any major changes, and was possibly due to make the jump onto Epsilon II, being a large FWD or AWD car. It could be a project that has been cut thanks in part to the "loss" of Opel and Saab, but I don't know for sure.

As for using the Lumina badge, I think it was too long ago, and too short of a run for people to care all that much. Outside the US, sure, it works fine. But here, as Joey pointed out, the memories aren't all that great. Keep in mind that the Lumina co-existed with the Caprice/Impala all the way through the late '80s and early '90s, so it wouldn't make a lot of sense to have it become the replacement... Again.

In all honesty, the Caprice title still holds a lot of weight at Chevrolet. It is instantly recognizable by fans of the brand, and those that are outside it, particularly when it brings up memories of the Caprice 9C1. However, I would think that it would be far more likely to see Chevrolet revive the old Caprice - Impala relationship that had existed for decades (the Caprice was the "normal" model, the Impala being "luxury"). But, it doesn't seem entirely likely as they are trying to keep portfolios tight.

Although, I must admit that the name "Caprice SS" does not flow as nicely as I'd like.

RE: Where to Build the "Caprice"

My guess is that they will remain imports from Australia, as Holden has remained a critical part of GM's current portfolio. They could make the decision to produce the car in Canada, as it is already tooled to build the Camaro (on the same platform), but I don't see what the benefit would be. Having it built here or there really is irrelevant to me, as the car wasn't built here in the first place. I'd love to have assembly sent off to Detroit or Flint, but I don't see it happening. For now, I think we're going to have to be satisfied with building the pretty awesome cars we already have (including the Volt, Viva, CTS, among others).

GM still builds an overwhelming majority of their vehicles sold in the United States... In the United States. Hard to believe, I know. Before the bankruptcy, that list included:

• Cobalt/G5 (Lordstown, OH)
• Malibu/G6/Aura (Fairfax, KS and Lake Orion, MI)
• Lucerne/DTS (Hamtrack, MI [may have this confused])
• Solstice/Sky (Wilmington, DE)
• Silverado/Sierra (Wisconsin, I believe? Or was in Hamtrack?)
• Vibe (NUMI California)

...I'm sure there are some I'm missing...

Of course, then we can bitch about where the parts come from, I suppose.





In general, I think its a smart move on GM's behalf. The G8 was burdened by a slightly high sticker price, and worst of all, a brand that too few cared about. Throwing a golden bowtie on the hood will bake-in a strong set of sales, and with a lower price (and likely a larger choice of engines later on), its going to appeal to a larger group of people. It makes perfect sense in my book, even if it comes at a loss to the Z/28 project.

 

[Joey D]

So if you REALLY feel THAT way then buy American, you can't say that's the way you feel when you bought a Mini, because that'd be hypocritical, which is what Joey did. Of course, I'm not saying you HAVE to support your country either, that's up to you, and I couldn't care less, everyone in the world are humans just the same trying to make a life for themselves.

Considering I bought my car in 2007 and we didn't bail them out until 2009 that might have been a bit difficult to do. GM was still sort of, kind of, financially sound when I purchased my car. I'm not going to ditch my car now and buy something else, that's asinine.

I'm all for supporting my country and it's economy, but I'm also out to buy a quality product. GM, Ford and Chrysler didn't make a small car that fit what I was looking for or was any good so I had to look elsewhere. I suppose I could have bought an Aveo, but I think those are universally known to car enthusiast as steaming piles. Not to mention an Aveo is a Korean car.

Really what's the difference between me sending my money to South Korea or the UK? Neither is America and I got the car I wanted.

In general, I think its a smart move on GM's behalf. The G8 was burdened by a slightly high sticker price, and worst of all, a brand that too few cared about. Throwing a golden bowtie on the hood will bake-in a strong set of sales, and with a lower price (and likely a larger choice of engines later on), its going to appeal to a larger group of people. It makes perfect sense in my book, even if it comes at a loss to the Z/28 project.

I doubt you'll see the price much lower, the Impala already starts at almost $24k so I can't really see GM dropping it down. I mean when buying a car is a $1,000 really that much of a difference considering a majority of buyers finance their cars any ways? If GM could offer a really basic version for $20k, like 4 banger and a stick, I think you'd see a lot of people bite because if you threw a couple of options on there you'd have a nice car for $22K or so. Although this is where a problem with building the car in Australia might come in, I have no idea on what the exchange rate or import/shipping fees are.

 

[McLaren]

So if you REALLY feel THAT way then buy American, you can't say that's the way you feel when you bought a Mini, because that'd be hypocritical, which is what Joey did. Of course, I'm not saying you HAVE to support your country either, that's up to you, and I couldn't care less, everyone in the world are humans just the same trying to make a life for themselves.

The reason I want GM to do well is not just because they own an Australian company, but because GM make cars I like at an affordable price for average blokes.

You're missing the point. If Joey & I willingly gave our money, then yes, it would be hypocritical.

However, we didn't have a choice. That's the difference. If you're going to take my money to support a company, I would hope my money was taken to support my fellow Americans at an American-based plant, not a plant in Australia.

 

[Paulie]

Considering I bought my car in 2007 and we didn't bail them out until 2009 that might have been a bit difficult to do. GM was still sort of, kind of, financially sound when I purchased my car. I'm not going to ditch my car now and buy something else, that's asinine.

I'm all for supporting my country and it's economy, but I'm also out to buy a quality product. GM, Ford and Chrysler didn't make a small car that fit what I was looking for or was any good so I had to look elsewhere. I suppose I could have bought an Aveo, but I think those are universally known to car enthusiast as steaming piles. Not to mention an Aveo is a Korean car.

Really what's the difference between me sending my money to South Korea or the UK? Neither is America and I got the car I wanted.

Just to clear this up, you're saying your opinion on the matter has changed since 2007?]

Edit: @ McLaren, last I checked tax money is taken regardless, and I'd rather mine be spent on things like keeping local jobs and keeping cars on the street that I like rather than some bridge hundreds of kms away I'll never even know exists. You may not like GM cars, but plenty of others still do, so don't pretend you're talking for all of America either.

 

[Joey D]

Just to clear this up, you're saying your opinion on the matter has changed since 2007?

My opinion is the same on the issue now as it was two years ago. However, my support for GM and it's bailout have gone from supportive to not supportive in the recent months.

My point is that if you want to buy American, you should actually buy a product made in America not elsewhere. And that if the American people are forced by its government to fork over a large amount of cash to a company, that company should go ahead and invest it in another country.

If we do get the Caprice (or whatever it may be called) then it will have to have some changes made to it for the American people and our laws. Those changes will be paid for through American tax dollars and more than likely be done in Australia, by Australians. No offence but I don't really want to support your country, if I did I would move there.

Edit: @ McLaren, last I checked tax money is taken regardless, and I'd rather mine be spent on things like keeping local jobs and keeping cars on the street that I like rather than some bridge hundreds of kms away I'll never even know exists. You may not like GM cars, but plenty of others still do, so don't pretend you're talking for all of America either.

Except we don't typically give tax dollars to corporations when they are in trouble, nor should we if we want to stay a capitalist society. The American people did not have a choice. It's irrelevant who liked GM or not, the government went against it's own principals by giving money to GM and for that I think more people should be pissed that they are investing money outside the nation.

 

[YSSMAN]

I doubt you'll see the price much lower, the Impala already starts at almost $24k so I can't really see GM dropping it down. I mean when buying a car is a $1,000 really that much of a difference considering a majority of buyers finance their cars any ways? If GM could offer a really basic version for $20k, like 4 banger and a stick, I think you'd see a lot of people bite because if you threw a couple of options on there you'd have a nice car for $22K or so.

The Impala was a bit less than that last I checked, but no big deal. They've been pushing nicely equipped LT (3.5L) models out for a while for less than $23K in most cases, which is an absolute steal in its class. Problem is that it most certainly is a case of "you get what you pay for," where it by no means would hold a candle to the infinitely better 2010 Taurus.

The nibbling over $1000, however, I think depends. For someone like me, a $1000 is a pretty big difference regardless of the financing. Its still a $1000, and I'd like to see it be worth something by comparison to another. If you look at the sticker prices of the G8, they were pretty low, but knocking a little bit off the top will make it just a little more appealing to people looking for a good deal. Your point on the four-pot model stands out even further in that situation, where that project had been placed on hold for the time being because of a "lack of interest" and of course the "strained budgets." Having a "value priced" Caprice with the 260 BHP turbocharged I4 would make its spot in the market very interesting, but that would likely depend on what the Aussies intend to do. If they're continuing to promise a lighter and more efficient Commodore... We can assume they'll do the same with the Caprice.

Just as a thought, I think if Chevrolet would sell a "green" Caprice with the low-resistance tires, the turbo I4, and a tall six-speed box, they'd move pretty quickly. Get the fuel economy on the highway somewhere in the neighborhood of 26+ MPG and you've got a nice corner in the market.



RE: More on Where the Cars are Coming From

I guess for me, seeing as how Holden is still a part of the company, they're no less deservant of the contracts to build the car as we are. After all, if we are free market capitalists (as we should be), the cars should be produced where it is cheapest. As of now, it would be cheapest to produce them in Australia and place them on a boat. I have no problem with that. General Motors is still a global company that took money from more than just the United States Treasury, and consequently, they are going to be held responsible by those governments to build vehicles in their respective areas as well.

Seeing as how the cars were already being built there in the first place, and given the probable costs involved in moving production to the US, the entire situation becomes rather silly. Perhaps in the next generation, or in an evolution of the model, they would build the cars and the under-used Canadian plant... But I wouldn't see any American production likely at any point.

 

[Joey D]

The Impala was a bit less than that last I checked, but no big deal. They've been pushing nicely equipped LT (3.5L) models out for a while for less than $23K in most cases, which is an absolute steal in its class. Problem is that it most certainly is a case of "you get what you pay for," where it by no means would hold a candle to the infinitely better 2010 Taurus.

Per the GM website, the 2009 Impala's are $23,790 although I think with the amount of incentives now you'd be hard pressed to pay MSRP for any GM save for a Camaro or Vette. I suspect you are right with the Taurus though, I would guess it is better just based on the fact it's a newer platform and Ford still has some money floating around the R&D department.

The nibbling over $1000, however, I think depends. For someone like me, a $1000 is a pretty big difference regardless of the financing.

Even with financing isn't it like $15/ $1,000 per month? That's a couple trips to McDonald's or one night eating at home over going to Applebee's or something.

Your point on the four-pot model stands out even further in that situation, where that project had been placed on hold for the time being because of a "lack of interest" and of course the "strained budgets." Having a "value priced" Caprice with the 260 BHP turbocharged I4 would make its spot in the market very interesting, but that would likely depend on what the Aussies intend to do. If they're continuing to promise a lighter and more efficient Commodore... We can assume they'll do the same with the Caprice.

I still will never understand why people can not buy into the concept of a four-cylinder in a car. You do not need a V8 and million horsepower to go to and from work. A 260hp Caprice would be great since that's more then enough to drive around without any "get-up-and-go" problems. And also the fuel economy would be good to like you mentioned.

 

[McLaren]

Edit: @ McLaren, last I checked tax money is taken regardless, and I'd rather mine be spent on things like keeping local jobs and keeping cars on the street that I like rather than some bridge hundreds of kms away I'll never even know exists.

Our money was taken for the exact purpose of bailing out GM. It's bad enough that they have to take even more of my money, but I have no desire to find out it's supporting another country.

You may not like GM cars, but plenty of others still do, so don't pretend you're talking for all of America either.

What the hell does my liking of GM cars have to with my money possibly going to support your country?

 

[YSSMAN]

I suspect you are right with the Taurus though, I would guess it is better just based on the fact it's a newer platform and Ford still has some money floating around the R&D department.

That's the thing... GM gets by selling a bazillion Impalas because they're cheap, they're big, and they just don't break. Its hard to come by these days. I think even if the market share on the car dwindled almost to oblivion, I could still see GM trying to sell a couple tens of thousands a year just because the profit margin is so wide on them. When you're using a 22 year old platform, yeah, I could see why. In this case, I could see GM bringing back the "Classic" moniker again.

Even with financing isn't it like $15/ $1,000 per month? That's a couple trips to McDonald's or one night eating at home over going to Applebee's or something.

I dunno, I guess I wouldn't be looking at it that way. Even if it is "only" $15 a month (trust me, I used your rationale for upgrading my phone), its still a noticeable difference when you aren't making much money to begin with. A $1000 is a $1000, no matter how long you have to pay it off... And when you start to factor in build quality, the driving experience, and all that jazz... Chevrolet will have to work that much harder to win sales back from the Taurus.

Which, come to think of it, makes the Caprice a direct reaction to the Taurus. If the internets are right, they're selling well. GM wants a part of it.

I still will never understand why people can not buy into the concept of a four-cylinder in a car... A 260hp Caprice would be great since that's more then enough to drive around without any "get-up-and-go" problems. And also the fuel economy would be good to like you mentioned.

Considering that a decade or more ago, a 260 BHP engine was a God-send, there is no reason why it would be that bad in a 4000 lb car. I seem to think of more than a few Mercedes products, not to mention the car's predecessor, the '94-'96 Impala SS.

 

[Keef]

I think they're getting to the limit of rebadges on this car before the public takes notice and starts laughing. Everyone now knows that the GTO and G8 were both Holdens. But when it becomes a Chevy they'll realize that it's simply yesterday's Pontiac and they're going to think GM cheaped out on it. Especially if it still looks remotely similar.

 

[Paulie]

I think they're getting to the limit of rebadges on this car before the public takes notice and starts laughing. Everyone now knows that the GTO and G8 were both Holdens. But when it becomes a Chevy they'll realize that it's simply yesterday's Pontiac and they're going to think GM cheaped out on it. Especially if it still looks remotely similar.

Except Pontiac died so it's either this or miss out on one of Pontiac's actually good offerings, not to mention the HUGE promise in the export program made to Holden. Holden would have lost a lot of money if they didn't carry the Commodore/Caprice to Chevy. As I said, the Chevy should get all the Commodore's new features, so it will be faster, more efficient and from Pontiac grille to Chev grille look different enough too. (Unless they use the long wheelbase Holden Caprice, in which case it becomes a luxury limo).

When you're hot you're hot, I don't see why anyone should be upset by re-badges.

 

[Joey D]

That's the thing... GM gets by selling a bazillion Impalas because they're cheap, they're big, and they just don't break. Its hard to come by these days. I think even if the market share on the car dwindled almost to oblivion, I could still see GM trying to sell a couple tens of thousands a year just because the profit margin is so wide on them. When you're using a 22 year old platform, yeah, I could see why. In this case, I could see GM bringing back the "Classic" moniker again.

So do you think GM will keep the Impala around if we get the Caprice in the states?

One thing that I think won't go over to well is that the Caprice is RWD. Sure enthusiast have been saying for years they want a RWD Impala, but really how many enthusiast actually drive Impala's or want one? I think that contributed to the G8's flop as well.

Most of the people who buy these types of cars do not really care about performance or RWD. The type of people that buy Impala's are people like my mom. They want a point A to B car that is reliable and comfortable, which the G8 was neither. Plus you have the whole "RWD is hard to control" stigma brought on by the older generations. I'll be interested to see how this plays out though.

I dunno, I guess I wouldn't be looking at it that way. Even if it is "only" $15 a month (trust me, I used your rationale for upgrading my phone), its still a noticeable difference when you aren't making much money to begin with. A $1000 is a $1000, no matter how long you have to pay it off... And when you start to factor in build quality, the driving experience, and all that jazz... Chevrolet will have to work that much harder to win sales back from the Taurus.

Ya I suppose I can see where you are coming from, not to mention a lot of people view price in powers of 10's. So a car that cost $23,995 is significantly cheap than one that cost $24,000.

I can see where they would run into problems with the Taurus as well, really the only people I can see straying away from the Taurus is enthusiast because the Taurus is the size of a house and FWD. However, as I've already said I doubt most people really want a RWD car anyways.

Considering that a decade or more ago, a 260 BHP engine was a God-send, there is no reason why it would be that bad in a 4000 lb car. I seem to think of more than a few Mercedes products, not to mention the car's predecessor, the '94-'96 Impala SS.

Even the current Impala weighs 3,700lbs and only has 211hp. Put a 260hp engine in there and it would wake the car up for sure.

I think they're getting to the limit of rebadges on this car before the public takes notice and starts laughing. Everyone now knows that the GTO and G8 were both Holdens. But when it becomes a Chevy they'll realize that it's simply yesterday's Pontiac and they're going to think GM cheaped out on it. Especially if it still looks remotely similar.

I agree. If GM keeps on with the same re-badging process they've done for ages people are going to start wondering where their money went, because it obviously didn't go into R&D. Also with the poor sales of both the GTO and G8 you wonder what GM is thinking by trying to pawn off another Holden on us considering we didn't like the last two.