GM sabotaging themselves.

[Michael_S]

Hello ladies and gents. I'm new to the forums.

I want to comment/ask for feedback, because I think GM has been shooting themselves in the foot. Here are my examples:

1994 Chevy makes the Impala SS with a detuned 'Vette engine. Why is it detuned? I don't know, but I'm guessing so that it won't compete with the low end Camaros and Firebirds. Never mind that it took the SS from a great car and turned it into a good car.

2004 Chevy makes the Impala SS with the 240 horsepower supercharged V-6. The 2003 Pontiac Bonneville with the same engine supercharged gets 260 horsepower. Why the difference? I don't know, but I'm guessing that they want to give Bonneville a competitive advantage over the Impala. That's great for the Bonneville, but sucks for the Impala SS. 240 horsepower for a sub $30,000 sedan would have rocked in 2000, but now there are plenty of cars the same or better in that price range.

2004 Pontiac Bonneville top model gets the NorthStar V-8 for Caddy, with an estimated 280 horsepower. The Cadillacs getting this engine for 2004 will get 300+ horsepower with it. Why the difference? I'm guessing to differentiate Cadillac from Pontiac. That's nice for Cadillac, but sucks for Pontiac.

Every time, they're trying to keep their own brands from stepping on each other. That only reduces their ability to compete with everyone else. Finally, it seems that GM is wising up. Next year's GTO is supposed to have the same engine power as the standard Corvette it received its engine from. The CTS-V is getting all 400 horses from the 'Vette Z06 engine.

Ford did this too with the Thunderbird and the detuned Lincoln LS V8. (Thankfully they didn't make that mistake with the Marauder.)
Chrysler's SOHC 3.5 liter V-6 makes more horsepower in the 300M than in the Dodge Intrepid. Same problem.

Am I wrong about this? Are there legitimate reasons these cars get weakened versions of good motors?

[MAD-3R]

alot of it may have to deal with CAFE.
GM Sells more Impala's then Bonnevile then Caddies.
With a slightly detuned engine can give the the car 1 or over .5 more miles per gallon, and when it's a case of say 25,000 chevys- 15,000 pontiacs - 9000 caddies, that can add up fast.

[Dr Caleb]

Just as sort of an off the side but still slightly on topic comment:

GM is re-branding the Regal as the "LaCrosse". LaCrosse is the national sport of Canada. The Buic LaCrosse will not be available in Canada.

Find out why: (don't be eating or drinking when you read this. I'm not responsible for damaged keyboards!)

http://www.nationalpost.com/home/story.html?id=8ABF7975-1D7B-4DDE-84F7-05E741FD412C

[chapel1]

I think our Marauder's are built with a cafe friendly computer program,which enables ford to beat a gas guzzler tax and provide milage numbers.
The nice part is if you like it that way it's fine ,but if you want more performance it's with in your hand's to make the Mods you feel nesscary.That's why I don't think ford will ever put a blower on a Marauder.You think thier having problems selling now?Well that's another story.

[BlackHole]

Originally posted by chapel1
I think our Marauder's are built with a cafe friendly computer program,which enables ford to beat a gas guzzler tax and provide milage numbers.
The nice part is if you like it that way it's fine ,but if you want more performance it's with in your hand's to make the Mods you feel nesscary.That's why I don't think ford will ever put a blower on a Marauder.You think thier having problems selling now?Well that's another story.

No the Speed Govt. is what makes the MM Cafe friendly and how it passed the EPA Gas tax. But your right about doing the mods to suit your style.:D :D :coolman:

[RCSignals]

Look up the specs on the Northstar and compare it to the DOHC in the Marauder.
Odd how the automotive media drools over the Northstar as being so powerful. It kind of pales to the MM engine

[Michael_S]

Originally posted by MAD-3R
alot of it may have to deal with CAFE.
GM Sells more Impala's then Bonnevile then Caddies.
With a slightly detuned engine can give the the car 1 or over .5 more miles per gallon, and when it's a case of say 25,000 chevys- 15,000 pontiacs - 9000 caddies, that can add up fast.

I hadn't thought of that! Thanks! I may not like it, but it does make sense.

[bigslim]

Ford does the same thing. The engine in the Mazda 6 is the same engine in the Taurus and LS. In the 6 it has 220hp, in the LS 240 and in the Taurus 200. The V8 in the LS is the same used in the Jaguar S-Type. In the LS it is 280hp and in the Jag 302. A lot of manufactors do this type of marketing. Nothing new.

[Michael_S]

Originally posted by RCSignals
Look up the specs on the Northstar and compare it to the DOHC in the Marauder.
Odd how the automotive media drools over the Northstar as being so powerful. It kind of pales to the MM engine

In the Cadillac XLR Roadster, the NorthStar is rated for 320 hp at 6000 RPM and 310 torque at 4400 RPM. In the Seville, it's 275 hp at 5600 RPM and 300 ft*lb at 4000 RPM.

The Marauder's got 302 hp at 5750 RPM and 318 ft*lb at 4250 RPM. That's better than the Seville, but more or less on par with the XLR.

I don't think the NorthStar pales to the Marauder engine, but even though they're pretty even it does get more attention.

[Michael_S]

Originally posted by bigslim
Ford does the same thing. The engine in the Mazda 6 is the same engine in the Taurus and LS. In the 6 it has 220hp, in the LS 240 and in the Taurus 200. The V8 in the LS is the same used in the Jaguar S-Type. In the LS it is 280hp and in the Jag 302. A lot of manufactors do this type of marketing. Nothing new.

It may be nothing new, but it strikes me as short sighted. If they're doing it for emissions and mileage reasons, that's fine. Otherwise, in their haste to make sure their cars aren't competitive with each other, they make them uncompetitive with cars from other auto makers.

How many more people would own a Taurus or a Mazda 6 if it offered a 240 horsepower V6? Probably quite a few.

The upcoming Impala SS with 240 horsepower will probably be on par or slower than the Accord V6, Altima 3.5 V6, Maxima, Dodge Intrepid 3.5 V6, Chrysler 300M 3.5, the Passat V6, and pretty much every other mid level family sedan with a half decent engine. Give it the 265 horses like the supercharged Bonneville, and they'd probably sell a lot more.

There are a number of reasons the Ford Thunderbird tanked, but one of them was that it originally had 265 horsepower in a 3800 pound two seater. That's pretty low for a $40,000 car. If it had 300 horsepower, who knows what the sales figures would have been - probably much better than they were.

etc... etc...

[BlackHole]

No1 Ford only wanted the T-Bird 2002/5 as a very limited produced vehicle so Ford is pulling the plug to keep its resale value UP!!!!!!!!!!!! thats really the only reason Ford is discontinuing the Bird. Sort of how Chrysler axed the Prowler due to the same type of problem to many out there and the value goes to the basement.

[Zack]

If youve ever driven a Cadillac Seville STS, youll know why they call it awesome!!
I almost bought a 97 STS before the Marauder, but really wanted a new car. You floor it at 20mph and the wheels spin and pull the front end over a full FOOT!! Hidden power is easy to find in the Northstar, but not many people go down this road. Im still a GM guy at heart (Cadillac especially) and this is probably the best engine GM ever made. (Except for where they put the starter)

[TJH-Houston]

No offense to BlackHole, but why would FMC care about resale of an exotic? They need volume to make any dough at all.

Tim

[Michael_S]

Originally posted by BlackHole
No1 Ford only wanted the T-Bird 2002/5 as a very limited produced vehicle so Ford is pulling the plug to keep its resale value UP!!!!!!!!!!!! thats really the only reason Ford is discontinuing the Bird. Sort of how Chrysler axed the Prowler due to the same type of problem to many out there and the value goes to the basement.

I respectfully disagree. If you look at the articles here:

http://www.blueovalnews.com/2003/tbird/reduxundone_joseph.050103.htm

and

http://www.auto.com/industry/tbird30_20030130.htm

Ford had a 183 day back inventory of the Thunderbird, when a normal car has a back inventory of around 55 days and a specialty car should have an even smaller one. The T-bird started way above MSRP in sales prices when it first came out but is now selling - when it sells - for $1,000 to $2,000 less.

The anticipated sales numbers were 25,000 to 30,000 a year, and they didn't even get that the first year it came out. Ford is killing the car because people aren't buying it.

[Michael_S]

Originally posted by Zack
If youve ever driven a Cadillac Seville STS, youll know why they call it awesome!!
I almost bought a 97 STS before the Marauder, but really wanted a new car. You floor it at 20mph and the wheels spin and pull the front end over a full FOOT!! Hidden power is easy to find in the Northstar, but not many people go down this road. Im still a GM guy at heart (Cadillac especially) and this is probably the best engine GM ever made. (Except for where they put the starter)

The redesign for the STS in 2005 drops the Seville name and switches back to a RWD platform. Should be very cool.

There's even a few rumors (according to edmunds.com) that GM is trying to iron out the kinks on a V12 for a top end STS model. It's probably just a pipe dream, but that would be WAY cool.

[RCSignals]

The two seat Thunderbird was never meant to be a large production vehicle, nor run for an extended number of years.
Personally i think it will have run too long.

Problems with the Thunderbird sales were similar to MM sales. An odd distribution, stock piling cars at Eastern US dealers and having almost none at Western dealers. Dealers being greedy and applying excessive surcharges to MSRP.
Out here, initially it was very hard for a dealer to get t-birds, even thought there was a demand for them. To some degree it's still that way.

[RCSignals]

Originally posted by Michael_S
In the Cadillac XLR Roadster, the NorthStar is rated for 320 hp at 6000 RPM and 310 torque at 4400 RPM. In the Seville, it's 275 hp at 5600 RPM and 300 ft*lb at 4000 RPM.

The Marauder's got 302 hp at 5750 RPM and 318 ft*lb at 4250 RPM. That's better than the Seville, but more or less on par with the XLR.

I don't think the NorthStar pales to the Marauder engine, but even though they're pretty even it does get more attention.

The Northstar is a good engine, and probably the direction GM should have taken with it's V8s.

The location of the starter, and the little plastic actuating parts are assinine.

The 320 HP and 310 lbft TQ of the XLR version come from adding vvt. I'm surprised that is all the increase was.

The base Northstar does pale to the Ford DOHC 4.6, in performance, and engineering.

add continously vvt to the Ford engine and see what happens.

The XLR weighs in at just 3643 lbs. GM claims a 0-60 of 5.7 sec, however I've seen printed track results of 6.5 seconds and 1/4 mile time of 14.8@97mph. Those are MM times, you'd expect better for the lighter, more aerodynamic XLR. If it were a ford, it would be highly criticised for that performance.

The supercharged V version will be interesting

[VaderSS]

1994 Chevy makes the Impala SS with a detuned 'Vette engine.

Main reason for this was to enhance low end torque so that the car would still be able to get that musclecar lunge with the relatively tall 3.08 gear and 1300 stall converter, both of which helped the car to get its 17 city 25 highway ratings.

Put a 300HP Vette engine in an otherwise stock Impala, and you'll have something that feels pretty gutless off the line. Now put that same engine behind a 2500 stall converter and 3.73s and yes, you'll have a quicker car than a stock engine behind the same setup, but your mileage will be more like 13 city/20 highway.


2004 Chevy makes the Impala SS with the 240 horsepower supercharged V-6. The 2003 Pontiac Bonneville with the same engine supercharged gets 260 horsepower.

Honestly, I think that this one IS brand concern. You want the Pontiac to be quicker than the Chevy, so you give it a bit more power. Is this shooting yourself in the foot? No, it's still much quicker than the non-SS Impala and it IS a cheaper car than the Pontiac. As far as penty of cars having the same or more power, well, we'll just have to see what happens in the magazine tests. I see lot's of high HP cars with seemingly slower times than they should have.

I am patiently waiting on Chevrolet's next Impala offering. It's already been stated that it will have a V8. It's th RWD part that's in the air. Does not really matter though, I already found my full size car. My next purchase will be in a different category, probably very small, unless someone comes out with a full size RWD V8 powered convertible that is... If Mercury had done that, I'd of dropped the Impala in a Heartbeat.;) (Today's Chevrolet..., Heartbeat my...) Well there's alway a '68 Impala 'vert.

[RCSignals]

well, you could have bought the Marauder concept convertible on eBay :lol:

[Michael_S]

Originally posted by RCSignals
The Northstar is a good engine, and probably the direction GM should have taken with it's V8s.

The location of the starter, and the little plastic actuating parts are assinine.

The 320 HP and 310 lbft TQ of the XLR version come from adding vvt. I'm surprised that is all the increase was.

The base Northstar does pale to the Ford DOHC 4.6, in performance, and engineering.

add continously vvt to the Ford engine and see what happens.

The XLR weighs in at just 3643 lbs. GM claims a 0-60 of 5.7 sec, however I've seen printed track results of 6.5 seconds and 1/4 mile time of 14.8@97mph. Those are MM times, you'd expect better for the lighter, more aerodynamic XLR. If it were a ford, it would be highly criticised for that performance.

The supercharged V version will be interesting

It depends which vehicle you gave it in. I mentioned the Seville and the XLR. The NorthStar in the Deville is 300 horsepower and 295 torque, if I recall correctly. I don't know if that is with or without VVT, but it's not too bad.

Remember also that the 4.6 V8 in the Marauder and the Ford Mach1 is (as far as I know) a tuned up version of the one in the Mustang GT. In the GT, it makes 260 horsepower and 302 torque - just a hair below the weakest NorthStar in the Seville.

The XLR-V will be supercharged? Nice.

[Michael_S]

VaderSS

Thanks for the info. The change to allow the Impala SS to get off the line more quickly make sense. I sit corrected.

As for the Pontiac and the Impala - I realize that the Bonneville costs a lot more. I still think it makes sense to put the best engine possible in the Impala. If you lose some Bonneville sales to the Impala, who cares? It's all GM anyway.

I know that rated horsepower isn't the end-all be all of performance. The numbers on paper do help to sell cars, though. Over in the RX8 forums, there were a handful of people that were thrilled with their RX8's speed until the news that it had 9 less horsepower than advertised. Even though they loved the seat of the pants feel, they returned the car anyway.

The previous van my Dad had was a GMC Safari with its 4.3 liter V6, and right now he has an Econoline with the 5.4 liter Triton V8. Both felt like rocket ships to drive. They weren't really that fast past 30 mph, but they had tons of torque off the line and it made them feel much quicker than they were.

[RCSignals]

Originally posted by Michael_S
It depends which vehicle you gave it in. I mentioned the Seville and the XLR. The NorthStar in the Deville is 300 horsepower and 295 torque, if I recall correctly. I don't know if that is with or without VVT, but it's not too bad.

Remember also that the 4.6 V8 in the Marauder and the Ford Mach1 is (as far as I know) a tuned up version of the one in the Mustang GT. In the GT, it makes 260 horsepower and 302 torque - just a hair below the weakest NorthStar in the Seville.

The XLR-V will be supercharged? Nice.

The only Cadillac with continuously vvt on the Northstar as far as I can find at this point is the one in the XLR, and that's the one I was talking about.

The Marauder and Mach1 engines are not "tuned up" versions of the Mustang GT engine.
Same basic family, but very different. The Mustang GT gets the SOHC 4.6. In the future it will likely get the 3-valve heads.

The Marauder and Mach1 engines are DOHC 4valve all aluminum 4.6s

[VaderSS]

As far as the Pontiac/Chevy thing, My opinion is not all that firm. I'll tell you though, Chevy is the top seller, and they sell with less margin than any other GM brand, so if GM can keep from scavenging sales from the more profitable cars, believe me, they will do everything they can.

Now on the subject of rated HP, yes, it does make for some sales, but I don't think that you lose as many sales with a conservative, but accurate number, as you do from being exposed as having a lower number than is really there. For a TRUE enthusiest, it's all about the package. If performance is the issue, then the performance numbers will be what you are looking at, not the HP.

Another thing to keep in mind with a blown 3.8; it has a wonderfully flat, smooth power curve. The acceleration is a long, sustained rush, not the peaky thing we have started to get used to. Those flat, smooth power curves tend to really suprise people when it comed to performance, even with a bit lower peak HP number.

[RCSignals]

Originally posted by Michael_S


The XLR-V will be supercharged? Nice.

that's the word currently. We'll see I guess

[Michael_S]

RCSignals,
The Mustang GT has the SOHC? Oops! Excuse me while I go gnaw on my foot a little. :) I thought it had the DOHC. It's interesting that Ford is going to 3 valves per cylinder. Will that still be SOHC? I guess it's a compromise between manufacturing both a 2 valve SOHC and a 4 valve DOHC - one engine instead of two, with a nice compromise between the two in performance and gas mileage.


VaderSS,
As for the supercharged Impala SS - I'm sure the performance will be impressive. On the other hand, every advertisement I've read for it says "From 0 to 'I'll take it' in 5 seconds", which strikes me as dishonest. I would think if the 0-60 mph time was impressive, they would post it.

I do appreciate that it's always better to advertise less horsepower than you get than the opposite, because the opposite always comes back to bite you - e.g. Mazda's mistakes with the Miata and RX8.

[jerrym3]

Ford TBird/Lincoln LS are 3.9 motors/280 HP while the Jag is 4.2/294 hp. Jag was a little guilty of over-estimatiing the real hp when first introduced.

Motors are from the same family, but displacement is different. (Sound familar? Ford's 352/390/428 or Chevie's 265/283/ 327??)

I don't know if my TBird has the "smaller Jag" motor or if the Jag S has the "larger Lincoln LS/TBird" motor.

Bet you can guess which description I use.