TriShield

By Edward Niedermeyer on April 20, 2010

First developed by Holden in 2004, GM’s Zeta platform now underpins vehicles as diverse as the Statesman/Lumina/G8/Caprice sedans and the Chevy Camaro. Originally designed for full-sized, rear-drive mainstream Australian sedans, Zeta was downsized as far as it could be for the Camaro, which reviewers largely view as overweight and rather too ungainly for true sportscar status.

Accordingly, GM has been developing a new rear-drive platform known as “Alpha,” which will form the basis of GM’s performance and luxury RWD models for the considerable future. Last we heard about Alpha was last August, when Bob Lutz swore there was no development underway of the platform he compared to BMW’s 1 and 3 Series. According to Motor Trend, work on the Alpha platform has begun… but there are already signs of trouble.

MT’s big scoop is that GM is “flexing” the Alpha platform. So what the hell does that mean in Ed Whitacre industry-novice-speak?

"We’ve learned that the platform is being “protected” for a variety of engines, including four-cylinders, supercharged or turbocharged V-6s, and the small block V-8. By “protected,” we mean the bodies are designed to allow for proper fitting of the various engines, whether they are offered with all the engine choices or not. You don’t “close off” the design to make it impossible to add a different engine or transmission initially unplanned. While four-cylinder engines are smaller than sixes and eights, of course, the cars also must accommodate active engine mounts to account for less inherent refinement and smoothness in the fours."

On the surface this seems like a hefty dollop of awesome. By building flexibility into its new platform, GM will be able to offer cheap, efficient four-bangers in budget enthusiast models (the next-generation Camaro will be based on Alpha) and big V8 power in extreme V-series versions of the Alpha-platform Cadillac, known as the ATS, as well as the next-gen CTS which will also be based on Alpha. Scratch a little deeper though, and some of the problems with this strategy reveal themselves.

The major issue with making Alpha capable of a full engine range is the perennial bane of the Zeta platform, namely weight. In fact, weight concerns were the very reason Hyundai decided to ban V6s from its new Sonata sedan. As Hyundai NA president John Krafcik explains in this video, by not having to engineer V6 and four-cylinder hardpoints, Hyundai’s developers were able to trim significant amounts of weight and mass from the Sonata. And with recent breakthroughs in direct-injected, turbocharged engine technology, they’re giving up little to nothing for the added lightness.

The problem for GM is that it’s invested so much in its power-mad Cadillac V-Series badge that it can’t develop the platform that will underpin the next CTS-V without at least leaving room for a “breathed-on V6.” Which, as MT explains, means they might as well just make it capable of rocking a small-block V8 as well:

"Breathed-on V-6s need engine bay accommodation for the blowers or turbos, and for intercoolers. This makes it easy to protect for a small block — overhead valves are more compact at the engine’s top than dual overhead cams with four valves per cylinder. Therefore, they fit more easily than the breathed-on sixes."

Meanwhile, there’s another problem:

"These plans are fluid. GM is said to be in a quandary over the transmission designed to accommodate these cars. It’s developing an eight-speed automatic for its V-6s. The question is, will the eight-speed be designed for front-wheel-drive or rear-wheel-drive?"

"Before you say, “both, of course,” be aware that new transmissions are very expensive. Adapting an eight-speed for both FWD and RWD can double the already healthy cost of doing it for just one configuration. And while BMW and Lexus eight-speed automatics so far serve only RWD-based cars, if GM decided to design it for transverse mounting, it would serve a much higher volume of cars and trucks."

"If it designs the transmission for RWD to better compete with BMW and Lexus, it probably would have to add the transmission to trucks and big SUVs in order to get enough volume."

Weight and expense problems? Trying to develop a single platform that’s capable of competitively executing every RWD application across several brands? Compromising mainstream variants in order to justify the insane engine requirements of low-volume halo versions? Does any of this sound like a new day for GM’s RWD reputation to you?

Don’t get me wrong: a sub-Zeta RWD platform is a great idea (in Cadillac’s case, probably an existentially necessary one), and my inner enthusiast thrills at the idea of both budget RWD treats and tiny, loony supersedans. But the last thing I want to see is GM spending taxpayer money developing a platform that tries to fill too many niches, only to end up a dud of a compromised-to-death mess.

Sure, platforms are becoming more flexible but so are engines. With the Pontiac Solstice GXP’s direct-injected Ecotec four-pot already making 260 horsepower, and with downsized, direct-injection turbo engines poised to become the short-term future of the car industry (to say nothing of CAFE), GM could make the Alpha platform four-cylinder-only and make up the performance difference with the reduced curb weight and engine technology. Too bad it probably won’t.

Gaunt

iTrader: (11)

Ambitious and destined for compromise-by-committee failure.

It would be cool, but I'm going the "I'll believe it when I see it" route.

WSsick

iTrader: (13)

you pretty much caught it all in that short response. although, if you want a low weight, bgi power, relatively efficient engine to solve all problems, how about a new DI LSx motor!?!? stick it in everything possible i say! (too bad that is the worst thing they could do)

RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

Maybe they should find reviewers that understand Camaro is not a "sportscar", nor should it strive to be one. Perhaps they are unaware of the little known nameplate GM offers in this category - Corvette; understandable, since it's only been in the line-up for 57 years.

Thank God it won't, assuming it's slated for Camaro as well. Turbo 4-cylinders are for the metro-sexual crowd; they don't ooze the testosterone nor provide the neck-snapping low end grunt of the more primal V8, no matter how much high rpm power they might make. Many if not most Camaro SS buyers will demand a V8 from GM, or they'll just move on to a V8 Mustang GT (I would, and I'm their target buyer).

justin455

^This, and they can argue MPG's all day long, but you won't see much difference, if any, in a 400hp turbo 4 and a 400 hp V8.

You gotta feed horses, not inches.

TriShield

I've heard the next LSX revision will introduce DI if I'm not mistaken.

I also agree that anything with four cylinders is not a Camaro.

XxGarbSxX

I partly agree with you. I love V8s and it's more or less a requirement for my next car. But there are also quite a few badass turbo 4s running around. The boxer in the STi, which also happens to be on my list of potential next cars despite its lack of a V8, and the 4g63t in DSMs and Evos are the first two that come to mind. The LNF in the Cobalt SS, Solstice GXP, and Sky Redline is also a pretty badass engine with great potential.

justin455

No one was taking anything away from respectable 4 cyl. engines. It's just not the same driving experience as a V8.

RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

Exactly.

All those other car/engine combos are fine for what they are. But your typical Camaro SS buyer will want a V8, plain and simple. It's a matter of heritage and the general character of the car.

99FormulaM6r

iTrader: (2)

What's this about an 8 speed auto???? Is it just to help Cadillac compete with Lexus/BMW/Mercedes? Is this kind of project really necessary? It seems like most competitors of GM's normal vehicles (ie, Malibu, LaCrosse, etc.) use 5 or 6 speed transmissions, and with GM's 6 speed autos, it seems pointless to spend money on this when you can spend money on different platform or engine options.

XxGarbSxX

Ok then. We're in agreement. The way RPM phrased his initial post made it sound like he was hating on every turbo 4 cylinder ever.

justin455

I didn't read it that way, but no harm done. Just look at his garage...doubt there will ever be a turbo 4 in that bunch...even a Grand National would most likely be pushing it.

Different strokes for different folks is all. I've had a quick DSM and while fun, was nowhere near as exciting to drive as a stock LS1. You'll just never see the Marlboro man smoking Virginia Slims.

RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

I don't "hate" them from the perspective that they have no place in the world. Quite the opposite in fact; I think if there is a market for these cars (which there seems to be) then GM should compete in said market if they can do so while making a decent profit. I don't think this is the right direction for Camaro though.

But, from a personal ownership perspective, this perfectly sums up my attitude:

With that said, there are many of us that will ALWAYS want a V8 in our Camaros, and if it's not offered we'd be more willing to buy a V8 Mustang than a turbo 4-cyl Camaro. So I think GM would be hurting themselves if they drop the V8 option for Camaro.

This is an interesting one Grand National is a future American classic that is probably the only non-V8 that I have ever considered owning as more than a basic DD.

WSsick

iTrader: (13)

Agreed. They have their place, but not in a modern day pony/muscle car, especially one with such a nostalgic nameplate.

this is an interesting point which i have always believed in. which such a tuner (read:tubo 4 lovers) heavy crowd out there, GM should at least throw its hat in the market. ive always thought the aveo would be a decent spot for it, kind of like the "hot hatches" of europe, which they love. the new aveo will look pretty sporty as well. give it a turbo 4 with ~200hp and i think you have a winner. not pushing a ton of boost for 200 hp, so fuel economy wouldnt be that hurt by it. also, with the advent of DI, you can stand to lose a few cubes and still make the 200 number. as long as it stays under 20k, perfect little car for the [young] person wanting a sporty, cheap car, as well as an enthusiast with a love on turbo 4s (sorry that ran so long lol)

They would feel the pain in 1 year of lost sales before they had to throw the V8 back in the mix. also, they have too much invested in the LSx tech to just scrap it.

Gaunt

iTrader: (11)

You guys haven't forgot about the Cobalt SS that fast have you?

2002_Z28_Six_Speed

iTrader: (19)

I am getting sick of people bitching about Zeta all day long.

Zeta could of been of a lot lighter if it employed more AL mainly in the control arms/linkages and other components. Also, if they ditched the 19's and 18's for reasonably sized wheels. Perhaps the aftermarket should come out with AL castings of those components but I doubt it would be profitable.

RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

Not at all. Isn't it still in production? I honestly don't know; turbo-4 stuff isn't my deal so I don't follow it very closely. But if they were making money on the car, then by all means they should continue it. However, this is absolutely NOT the right direction for Camaro. I don't think very many 4th or 5th gen V8 Camaro owners would embrace that engine as an LSx replacement either.

Breathing Fire

Glad someone finally posted about this. I have been reading for a while now about it and it sounds promising. Not worried about not getting the V8. You have to remember how small the Gen 3/4 engines really are. Add some DI and that makes it huge? Doubt it. It will have a V8. According to the article it will be "protected" for several engines. If they can stuff a turbo 6 in it a V8 ,assuming it is a pushrod, will be cake.

justin455

My thoughts on this would be to cut the V6 from the base level and replace with a nice turbo 4. That way you have the best of both worlds.

There for a minute I was really hoping for a Saturn Astra Redline with the LNF. That would have put a lot of euro "hot-hatches" in their place while avoiding the rental car stigma of the Cobalt or Aveo as you proposed.

I absolutely agree with the bold. It would be like the New Coke of the automotive world.

TriShield

Edmunds examines both the G8 and Camaro suspensions in detail.

http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtest...alkaround.html

http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtest...alkaround.html

The Camaro makes use of plenty of aluminum everywhere. It's probably about as light as it can be for a car it's size without totally gutting it or pricing it through the roof.

The fact that it accelerates, handles, rides, and drives as well as it does is really a testament to Holden's engineering talent.