Interesting article on 2015 materials and design

[Anvil3]

Well gents we might have some issues with the 6G Camaro. The S550 body in white weighs say 347kg or 765lbs. Not terribly Heavy, not that light either. I am looking at the body of 4dr ATS, it weighs 284kg or 626 lbs.

Granted the 2dr ATS is overall a hundred pounds heavier that 4dr at approximately 3570lbs. But I am not sure where the weight difference is between the 4dr and 2dr body in white ATS's. let's hope it's all in the body, and the base for the Camaro is only 40lbs Lighter in the body. And still heavier everywhere else.

Also no one including the big three use the English system of measurement, except in cursory fashion in big meetings with regards to weight. Everything is done in Metric.

EDIT on the plus side:

ATS
– I-4 and V-6 cylinder engines with manual or automatic
transmissions, rear and all wheel drive variants were
required
– GVM ranges from 1910 to 2125 kg
– V8 engines were not treated as part of the bandwidth
http://www.autosteel.org/~/media/Fi...eel Technologies in the 2013 Cadillac ATS.pdf

The latest indications are that the 6G Camaro will be closer in size to the CTS, which also uses the Alpha platform. As someone pointed out, the ATS is pretty small.

Sponsored

 

[Madlock]

In this picture, you can see the additional support that connects the rail to the Rocker. This appears to be a bit more direct than the previous car. It is also bridging the rail to the rocker, furthermore, kinda eliminating the middle man (those miter cuts and torque box). This looks heavy duty compared to the ATS-V's Alpha. It's all teeny tiny...

Regardless of intent or result, it seems the engineering strategy for developing S550 was to built upon and adapt and improve S197 as little as necessary rather than the approach GM took with Alpha which was to begin as much as possible from the ground up and include only the lightest implementation of whatever delivered the strength required.

On one hand, Ford was able to do wring a tremendous amount from relatively little while GM simply brought to bear whatever resources its desired results required. Then again, GM had tens of billions of other people's dollars to spend and no need to yield any kind of immediate investment return upon the investments it made while Ford had to make what it could from the resources it earned.

So much more the reason why every vehicle GM produces is the unfair expense of every legitimate car maker. Yet, despite some of the truly tremendous product improvements GM has made, Cadillac simply isn't a brand anybody desires to own enough to pay the price required to buy one, at least not without GM's willingness to pay each customer thousands of dollars to buy one - meaning other makers not only must compete with GM's products, but the bribes GM pays its customers too.

ATS, CTS, C7 and other GM models represent some truly amazing improvements. Yet despite being a world class sports car with performance on par with with supercars like Ferarri, C7 commands a mere fraction of the price - and often less than the 14 GT500 which effectively was a nine year-old chassis with a suspension derived from Roman chariots. Such is the importance of brand equity - and how people glady pay more to own mediocre iterations of BMW and Mercedes products than the latest sh*t hot products from Cadillac - whose prices GM just needed to reduce by $1000-$3000 because simply too few people were interested.

But platforms are just one manifestation of the phenomenon. Ford and GM are partnering on 10-speed transmissions in the same way they co-developed the now-ubiqutous 6-speed. This was to be the next generation transmission for both makers and derivatives would underpin drivetrains in everything from trucks to performance models.

Because it's not yet complete, Ford is at least two years away from its first implementation, which is one reason it invested so heavily in lightweighting trucks through Aluminum first to mantain a competitive advantage. Well, with $30B of free money on its balance sheet and a P&L thrown out of whack so badly due to recalls and lethal concealed ignition design flaws, nothing stood in the way of throwing a heap of money at designing a phenomenal new proprietary 8-speed transmission which it now uses in C7, Sierra and Silverado which in all likelihood will be used for just two years until its superseded by its jointly-developed successor.

No other maker would've spent so much to develop something with such a relatively limited lifespan. FCA pays to license its 8-speed boxes from ZF while Ford invested in Aluminum until it could afford to make further investments elsewhere later on. On one hand, it's terrific Ford nevertheless is doing enough right things to remain competitive. On the other, consumers are demonstrating their gnat-like attention spans over even the most egregious transgressions and proving there's no bad deed that another $500 on the hood can't overcome.

That's why I'm both thrilled at everything Ford seems to have achieved during its migration from S197 to S550, while being furious that it must compete with its competitors all-but-unlimited resources and therefore MUST deliver a product that's merely as good as it must be rather than every bit as terrific as Ford otherwise could've made it.

Sorry for the harangue. But every time I'm reminded of all the technical innovations GM has made during the past few years and how fawningly some people (not you) admire them, I can only think to myself that for the same amount of money saving GM required, man could be roaming mars and a cancer or two could've been cured. In that context, the stable of new and dramatically improved GM products suddenly seems much less impressive.

 

[Merle]

I remember older adults joking how thin the sheetmetal was on their new cars during the 1970's--its nothing new.

In the mid 50's at the high school I attended at Haloween they would
take a 40's car and CHARGE 50 cents to hit the car (1) One time with
a HEAVY SLEDGE HAMMER and it would ONLY DENT A FENDER 1/4 INCH!
This was a money maker for the school because the car would take A
LOT OF ABUSE.

 

[Merle]

Regardless of intent or result, it seems the engineering strategy for developing S550 was to built upon and adapt and improve S197 as little as necessary rather than the approach GM took with Alpha which was to begin as much as possible from the ground up and include only the lightest implementation of whatever delivered the strength required.

On one hand, Ford was able to do wring a tremendous amount from relatively little while GM simply brought to bear whatever resources its desired results required. Then again, GM had tens of billions of other people's dollars to spend and no need to yield any kind of immediate investment return upon the investments it made while Ford had to make what it could from the resources it earned.

So much more the reason why every vehicle GM produces is the unfair expense of every legitimate car maker. Yet, despite some of the truly tremendous product improvements GM has made, Cadillac simply isn't a brand anybody desires to own enough to pay the price required to buy one, at least not without GM's willingness to pay each customer thousands of dollars to buy one - meaning other makers not only must compete with GM's products, but the bribes GM pays its customers too.

ATS, CTS, C7 and other GM models represent some truly amazing improvements. Yet despite being a world class sports car with performance on par with with supercars like Ferarri, C7 commands a mere fraction of the price - and often less than the 14 GT500 which effectively was a nine year-old chassis with a suspension derived from Roman chariots. Such is the importance of brand equity - and how people glady pay more to own mediocre iterations of BMW and Mercedes products than the latest sh*t hot products from Cadillac - whose prices GM just needed to reduce by $1000-$3000 because simply too few people were interested.

But platforms are just one manifestation of the phenomenon. Ford and GM are partnering on 10-speed transmissions in the same way they co-developed the now-ubiqutous 6-speed. This was to be the next generation transmission for both makers and derivatives would underpin drivetrains in everything from trucks to performance models.

Because it's not yet complete, Ford is at least two years away from its first implementation, which is one reason it invested so heavily in lightweighting trucks through Aluminum first to mantain a competitive advantage. Well, with $30B of free money on its balance sheet and a P&L thrown out of whack so badly due to recalls and lethal concealed ignition design flaws, nothing stood in the way of throwing a heap of money at designing a phenomenal new proprietary 8-speed transmission which it now uses in C7, Sierra and Silverado which in all likelihood will be used for just two years until its superseded by its jointly-developed successor.

No other maker would've spent so much to develop something with such a relatively limited lifespan. FCA pays to license its 8-speed boxes from ZF while Ford invested in Aluminum until it could afford to make further investments elsewhere later on. On one hand, it's terrific Ford nevertheless is doing enough right things to remain competitive. On the other, consumers are demonstrating their gnat-like attention spans over even the most egregious transgressions and proving there's no bad deed that another $500 on the hood can't overcome.

That's why I'm both thrilled at everything Ford seems to have achieved during its migration from S197 to S550, while being furious that it must compete with its competitors all-but-unlimited resources and therefore MUST deliver a product that's merely as good as it must be rather than every bit as terrific as Ford otherwise could've made it.

Sorry for the harangue. But every time I'm reminded of all the technical innovations GM has made during the past few years and how fawningly some people (not you) admire them, I can only think to myself that for the same amount of money saving GM required, man could be roaming mars and a cancer or two could've been cured. In that context, the stable of new and dramatically improved GM products suddenly seems much less impressive.

I LOVED READING THIS! Buttttttttt..... I disagree with you on GM ADVANCES. In 2014 GM RECALLED OVER 30 MILLION VEHICLES due to
cost cuts and short cuts JUST TO SAVE DOLLARS and to hell with
safety and anything else. THIS ALL STARTED JUST AFTER MODEL
YEAR 2000! I HAVE BEEN A FORD MAN AND BOY since late 40's.
I LOVE FORD STYLE AND SERVICE I GET OUT OF MY FORD VEHICLES
But I Hate The Rear And The Interior of the 15 Stang. Thank You!

 

[thePill]

Regardless of intent or result, it seems the engineering strategy for developing S550 was to built upon and adapt and improve S197 as little as necessary rather than the approach GM took with Alpha which was to begin as much as possible from the ground up and include only the lightest implementation of whatever delivered the strength required.

On one hand, Ford was able to do wring a tremendous amount from relatively little while GM simply brought to bear whatever resources its desired results required. Then again, GM had tens of billions of other people's dollars to spend and no need to yield any kind of immediate investment return upon the investments it made while Ford had to make what it could from the resources it earned.

So much more the reason why every vehicle GM produces is the unfair expense of every legitimate car maker. Yet, despite some of the truly tremendous product improvements GM has made, Cadillac simply isn't a brand anybody desires to own enough to pay the price required to buy one, at least not without GM's willingness to pay each customer thousands of dollars to buy one - meaning other makers not only must compete with GM's products, but the bribes GM pays its customers too.

ATS, CTS, C7 and other GM models represent some truly amazing improvements. Yet despite being a world class sports car with performance on par with with supercars like Ferarri, C7 commands a mere fraction of the price - and often less than the 14 GT500 which effectively was a nine year-old chassis with a suspension derived from Roman chariots. Such is the importance of brand equity - and how people glady pay more to own mediocre iterations of BMW and Mercedes products than the latest sh*t hot products from Cadillac - whose prices GM just needed to reduce by $1000-$3000 because simply too few people were interested.

But platforms are just one manifestation of the phenomenon. Ford and GM are partnering on 10-speed transmissions in the same way they co-developed the now-ubiqutous 6-speed. This was to be the next generation transmission for both makers and derivatives would underpin drivetrains in everything from trucks to performance models.

Because it's not yet complete, Ford is at least two years away from its first implementation, which is one reason it invested so heavily in lightweighting trucks through Aluminum first to mantain a competitive advantage. Well, with $30B of free money on its balance sheet and a P&L thrown out of whack so badly due to recalls and lethal concealed ignition design flaws, nothing stood in the way of throwing a heap of money at designing a phenomenal new proprietary 8-speed transmission which it now uses in C7, Sierra and Silverado which in all likelihood will be used for just two years until its superseded by its jointly-developed successor.

No other maker would've spent so much to develop something with such a relatively limited lifespan. FCA pays to license its 8-speed boxes from ZF while Ford invested in Aluminum until it could afford to make further investments elsewhere later on. On one hand, it's terrific Ford nevertheless is doing enough right things to remain competitive. On the other, consumers are demonstrating their gnat-like attention spans over even the most egregious transgressions and proving there's no bad deed that another $500 on the hood can't overcome.

That's why I'm both thrilled at everything Ford seems to have achieved during its migration from S197 to S550, while being furious that it must compete with its competitors all-but-unlimited resources and therefore MUST deliver a product that's merely as good as it must be rather than every bit as terrific as Ford otherwise could've made it.

Sorry for the harangue. But every time I'm reminded of all the technical innovations GM has made during the past few years and how fawningly some people (not you) admire them, I can only think to myself that for the same amount of money saving GM required, man could be roaming mars and a cancer or two could've been cured. In that context, the stable of new and dramatically improved GM products suddenly seems much less impressive.

This was very eye opening, I read it 3 times...

 

[phil1336]

This was very eye opening, I read it 3 times...

I read it but once and took )2) Aleve Caplets!:doh:

 

[Madlock]

I read it but once and took )2) Aleve Caplets!:doh:

Yeah, I know. Every once in a while the whole subject sends me off on a bender.

Yet those who think there's such a thing as a free lunch or exempting one set of people from accountability won't just shift the burden to others only increase the likelihood of history repeating itself - but not nearly as much as those who roll their eyes, throw up their hands and refuse to be bothered.

At least when the wheels DO come off, literally and figuratively, it won't be because I didn't speak up.

Besides, the EU/UK already has enough problems with PSA Citroen on the brink of collapse and all the new marketshare Opel/Vauxhall is goobling up at a loss despite almost 20 years of consecutive losses and having failed once already.

C'est la vie, I suppose.

 

[opensesame]

??

 

[phil1336]

As I recall in listening to my earliest Fairy Tales, remember Lucy Goosie and "The Sky is Falling". How about worrying instead about your Air Bag accidentally deploying and killing you instantly with shrapnel. You risk getting eaten by a Shark every time you put a foot in the Ocean or being attacked by an Alligator or Poisonous Snake if you live in South FL too!

Sponsored