GM Chief Mark Reuss Needs Your Help Designing A Cheap RWD Chevy

[Ash]

Can't believe no one else got to this one yet. Jalopnik post from Wednesday:

"North American GM boss Mark Reuss has responded to our exclusive story about Chevy's rear-wheel drive plans with a plea, of sorts, to help him figure out how to make it happens. Put on your thinking caps, boys and girls, we need to get this done. As reported, Reuss is still interested in building a rear-wheel drive vehicle that can slot in under Camaro as a 2+2 coupe. It needs to draw from the existing (or proposed) universe of parts and, as we've explained, the Alpha platform probably isn't going to work. Mark's going to drive to the Indy 500 and think on it himself but he's asked us to "give it a go men!" Leave your thoughts in Kinja and we'll make sure Reuss sees them"


Let you're voice be heard in the comments section of the first hyperlink.

[EFI69Cam]

Can't believe no one else got to this one yet. Jalopnik post from Wednesday:

"North American GM boss Mark Reuss has responded to our exclusive story about Chevy's rear-wheel drive plans with a plea, of sorts, to help him figure out how to make it happens. Put on your thinking caps, boys and girls, we need to get this done. As reported, Reuss is still interested in building a rear-wheel drive vehicle that can slot in under Camaro as a 2+2 coupe. It needs to draw from the existing (or proposed) universe of parts and, as we've explained, the Alpha platform probably isn't going to work. Mark's going to drive to the Indy 500 and think on it himself but he's asked us to "give it a go men!" Leave your thoughts in Kinja and we'll make sure Reuss sees them"


Let you're voice be heard in the comments section of the first hyperlink.

Based on the article it would make more sense for the smaller than Camaro RWD car to be called something else then Chevelle. They would anger the purists with a 4cyl scion type car and the market for that car would not get the name.
The "SS" sedan should have been the Chevelle.

[paulgurley]

Chevy needs to make a small coupe 4 cylinder turbo that gets great gas mileage and keep the weight under 3000 lbs. and if they make the chassis as good as the fr-s/brz it will sell like crazy

The new Camaro is awesome but it is way to big and heavy and the worst part of it all is it is still very small on the inside.

If they made a new chassis and called it chevelle/nova/or whatever it doesn't matter, and kept it under 3000 lbs with a 4cyl turbo that would be great, and then they could base the new camaro off of that chassis but put a v8 in it. and the mustang would not stand a chance.

I am 20 years old and have a 68 camaro project car and a 95 nissan 240sx as a daily driver. I would rather put an ls1 in my 240sx then buy the new camaro because it would be much more lightweight and more fun to drive. (I can't afford to do that but that's what I would do if I could).

Many people buy japanese cars and put v8s in them because they are lightweight and handle great and the ls1 platform doesn't weigh that much more than a 4 cyl turbo.

My generation is very into "JDM" and as they get older they will probably stick with japanese brands. Chevy needs to come out with a light weight rwd car and change the game and take out the japanese cars.

[novaderrik]

in other words, they already have something in the works and they want to make the public believe that they had a hand in designing it.

[Rhino]

in other words, they already have something in the works and they want to make the public believe that they had a hand in designing it.

It's not without precedent for the public to have significant input on the finished product. GM invited a group of enthusiasts to help make key decisions for the 5th gen camaro.

[tazzz25906112]

I'm a little confused,,,, a Chevelle (or at least it's name sake) was a mid size car not a economy size car... Use a name sake effectively,, not like the 80's Chrysler/Shelby relationship with the Shelby Daytona's... A name won't carry you the product has to match the imagery/memory of the nameplate....

A quick question and food for thought frankly,,,,, why hasn't GM considered using an existing platform and grafting on a body that carries the styling of an original 60's or early 70's Chevelle??? They did it with the current Camaro and it appears to be a fairly success in sales,,, and Dodge did it with the Challenger..

Instead of rehashing a name sake, rehash the the glory days of GM and make us all want to buy American again... You guys have come a long way and unless governmental restrictions prevent it,,, why wouldn't you take the path of least resistance??? If you made a car similarly styled to either 60's or early 70"s Chevelle body styles and really carried the imagery as close as possible given current safety requirements,,, I'd have to think it'd be a great success.... Hell Porsche has been holding the line on general styling for years and they just keep selling the Hell out of there product year after year... You want feed back,, you got it now stop trying to reinvent and start recreating your past success...

As a side note,,, it's great to see you considering rear wheel drive again as front wheel drive almost cost you the corporation and notable lost market share in almost every sector of your line up....

[MonzaRacer]

If I saw a car similar to my Monza but possibly updated style wise, std 4 cyl, v 6 turboed , and maybe even a mild small V8, RWD, short wheel base and could even share some parts with a smaller GM car similar to Cobalt.
A Chevelle badged car would be cool but needs to be between Camaro and SS.
But a smaller Monza styled vehicle, shorter wheel base, but well handling, keep it on smaller 17s, maybe even install an air ride type suspension as an option. Smaller powerplant types could target entry level performance enthusiasts, keep the versions very close, but properly setup an honest attempt would put them out there with budget minded but efficient cars maybe even start up a racing series for them to compete in things like autocrossing, road events like we PT car builders shoot for.
I could see an updated style IMSA Monza inspired platform, again with multiple power plants turboed or supercharged.
Also I could see a car developed around current suspension ideas yet be also ways to add in say coil over strut type or SLA coil over suspension(and prerequisite air suspension also) from say ridetech,,,.
Just something I always dreamed about, being able to rebuild the Monza type car but in current technology.
Gets a guy thinking.

[novaderrik]

If I saw a car similar to my Monza but possibly updated style wise, std 4 cyl, v 6 turboed , and maybe even a mild small V8, RWD, short wheel base and could even share some parts with a smaller GM car similar to Cobalt.
A Chevelle badged car would be cool but needs to be between Camaro and SS.
But a smaller Monza styled vehicle, shorter wheel base, but well handling, keep it on smaller 17s, maybe even install an air ride type suspension as an option. Smaller powerplant types could target entry level performance enthusiasts, keep the versions very close, but properly setup an honest attempt would put them out there with budget minded but efficient cars maybe even start up a racing series for them to compete in things like autocrossing, road events like we PT car builders shoot for.
I could see an updated style IMSA Monza inspired platform, again with multiple power plants turboed or supercharged.
Also I could see a car developed around current suspension ideas yet be also ways to add in say coil over strut type or SLA coil over suspension(and prerequisite air suspension also) from say ridetech,,,.
Just something I always dreamed about, being able to rebuild the Monza type car but in current technology.
Gets a guy thinking.

if they did reuse the Monza badge, they would say that it pays tribute to the Corvair Monzas of the 1960's and all the press coverage would be about how Ralph Nader killed it..

[LeighP]

This is a Holden Torana (show car - one off special). GMH built it a couple of years ago. Smaller than the Commodore/SS.
It has a twin turbo V6 RWD.
GM should build it...

[Barrrf]

So a small "parts bin" RWD car. Hmmmmm..........hasnt this been done already? I dont see the difficulty here other than that its been done once and it couldnt compete with the Miata.

Whilst Id like to see a new model car that I would never buy just for the sake of it begin there - it doesnt make economic sense unless GM can build it for a couple grand and sell it for multiple thousands more.

[JayR]

Judging by the small sportscars they trotted out at Detroit last year, they definitely do need help. Badly. Those were two awesome examples of irrelevant.

How awesome would a RWD Chevy built on the Cadillac ATS platform be?! Let's say sedan, coupe and a shooting brake bodystyle, N/A Ecotec, Turbo Ecotec, V6 and a turbo V6 for power and offer base models, AWD models and rental cars to help justify the business model. Based on the size, power-plants, diversity and bodystyles, it would sell like crazy in all bodystyles and barely put a knick in Camaro sales which is the main reason GM won't make anything else worth a crap under $35k and probably why the new 2014 Super Sport is slated to be such a limited run. If they made as many as they could sell, Charger sales would take a hit!

And just in case the General's balls are finally dropping, do a Super Sport wagon too! The Commodore it's based on is already available in wagon form so it wouldn't take much.

[Rhino]

Focusing on Chevy, what the heck has their styling department been doing lately? Yea, I understand you need a cohesive "design language" but not everything needs the Camaro's tail lights.

I've been a diehard fan from birth, but IMO the exteriors now are looking worse than the interiors of the early 2000's

[Mr.VENGEANCE]

ha call it a corvair...

[hoosiergta]

ha call it a corvair...

While I know the monza came first. ( I had a 79 305 , 4speed , limited slip diff, F41 suspension. The 3rd gen F- body is basically a swollen version of it. I love the 87 GTA I have but that little monza was a lot more fun. It really did need some breaks though. I say bring back the Solstice Hardtop and call it a Buick Bansee or Make us a little wagon of it and put some body work on it to give us that Nomad we were teased with a while back. Hot Rod showed that a LS would fit. But I think maybe a 150 cubic inch v-4 LS based engine with a turbo would be great.

[Nicks67GTO]

If its going to be smaller than the Camaro it should probably be a Chevy II. Make it a 4 cylinder turbo car as a baseline and have the V8 be the SS model? If its going to share a bit of the Camaro platform then the Nova is the easy answer. If theyre going to do that it better be retro looking though. Of the big 3, chevy is the farthest off on their retro looks.

[BonzoHansen]

the current camaro is chevelle sized or more. why not make the 6th gen camaro the smaller and cheaper car and make the larger car the chvelle/etc. You know, the SS......

[Ash]

I agree with Paul on this one, and If they really want to emulate the ft-86, It's gotta have a $25,000 price tag. Sorry for turning this into an editorial, but it seems the equation is so easy. They have got to design it methodically and with enthusiast and the aftermarket as the focus, as well as give dozens upon dozens of finished cars to well established tuning companies for product development. That last part is where Toyota got it spot on. What normally takes a year or so to do after release, aftermarket parts hitting the street, they were able to pull off at launch.

Compartment space to make engine work easy, extra space for larger front mount intercoolers and larger tubing without cutting bumper beams, high durometer rubber bushings, a common bolt pattern (5x114.3), factory rolled fenders, Inter-company caliper swaps are a mainstay these days and Performance rotor thickness needs to be on par with well established factory 4-pot's for conversions (i.e. 32mm for GTS/GTR Skylines, Camaro 1LE, corvette base/Z51/Z06 6-pot...which would also allow for 30mm specked calipers with 2mm shaved pads to bolt up: STI/WRX, Z32 300zx, BMW, and Audi), a real optioned traction control/ABS/Stability (not just on/off), seats with provisions for harnesses, wheel wells that fit 10.5" wide wheels stretched front and rear (for the stance crowd), have a Quaife/Eaton Diff available at launch, maybe a clutch-less sequential Manual à la MR2 Spyder to switch things up. Steering feel and shift engagement have got to perfect.

Not for nothing, but to do this car right, a V8 shouldn't even be an option....at least not for a couple years. Keeping a V8 out of the equation would allow the designers to go all out, without devaluing the more expensive V8 models

A base 2.5L LCV 4 cylinder
202 hp @ 6300 rpm
190 lb/ft @ 4400 rpm
6 speed Auto: 22 City/33 Hwy
87 Octane
7,000 RPM redline
E-85 compatible


A 2.0T LTD Turbo 4 Cylinder
272 hp @ 5500 rpm
260 lb/ft @ 1700-5500 rpm
ATS 0-60 in 6.3
6 speed Auto: 21 City/31 HWY
6 speed Stick: 19 City/30 Hwy
91 Octane recommended
87 Octane -20HP

A 3.6 LFX V6
323 hp @ 6800 rpm
278 lb·ft @ 4800 rpm
Camaro 0-60 in 6.4 seconds
ATS 0-60 in 5.7
19 MPG City
30 MPG HWY
87 Octane

TL/DR aye?

[Mr.VENGEANCE]

no really.. Corvair.

[Sales-TCI-Eng]

If GM had even the slightest bit of insight into what the next generation wanted they would have just put a roof on a Sky/Solstice 5 years ago and completely blown the FRS/BRZ holdouts out of the water. Oh wait, they did and it totally flopped. Chalk that one up to poor marketing, or at least marketing it to the wrong demographic. Can't blame them for trying to join the party, even if it is a little late.

-J

[AusMarty]

Torana/Nove

Duh.

RWD with options from 4 cyl turbo to LS V8.