- #5298 of 6844
-
Re: 2009 maxima [allmet33]
by louiswei
-
Feb 21, 2008 (12:24 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: allmet33 (Feb 21, 2008 12:17 pm)
The platform dedicate for CTS will be too small for a RWD Impala, period.
Sure GM can re-work a CTS platform to fit a RWD Impala but that doesn't mean the Impala is based on CTS, it just meant that the two are platform mates.
ES is "based on" Camry
G8 is "based on" commodore
Sierra is "based on" Silverado
Is the Azera based on Sonata since it is built on a stretched Sonata platform? If your answer is yes then I rest my case because that just means your definition for "based on" is different than mine.
|
- #5299 of 6844
-
Re: 2009 maxima [captain2]
by imidazol97
-
Feb 21, 2008 (12:28 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: captain2 (Feb 21, 2008 6:52 am)
You might want to read through the 4 pages of the PR piece by the Toyota person in the promo story. He pretty well lists the parts that were changed or modified from the previous Camry chassis.
I only scanned your post because of your tone. Do some research. I'll skip your posts unless they are other than contentious.
Back to discussing full-sized cars.
|
- #5300 of 6844
-
Re: 2009 maxima [louiswei]
by allmet33
-
Feb 21, 2008 (12:34 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: louiswei (Feb 21, 2008 12:24 pm)
Okay...now we have an arguement. If it starts out as a CTS platform and it's reworked to fit the Impala...then it IS based on a CTS platform.
As stated, the Azera rests on a stretched version of the Sonata platform, since it started out as a Sonata platform and they stretched it to accomodate the Azera...yeah, the Azera is based on a Sonata platform.
So, I guess...it just boils down to a definition.
|
- #5301 of 6844
-
Re: 2009 maxima [allmet33]
by captain2
-
Feb 21, 2008 (12:36 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: allmet33 (Feb 21, 2008 12:17 pm)
no I said the car was too small -RWD configurations tend to be less space efficient than FWD ones. Based on wheelbase, vehicle length, or width the CTS fits the definition of a 'large car'. When you actually sit in the thing however or more precisely 'sentence' some real full-sized adults to the back seat for example, then you understand why the CTS is too small. The STS, OTH, something a bit different. I haven't seen interior specs. for the Genesis yet, but it wouldn't surprise me if it is a 'smaller' car than the Azera. FWD does have some advantages and 'packaging' is usually one of them.
BTW that would now be TWO things we've agreed on this week 
In order for it to be based on, it must share something in common, right?
|
- #5302 of 6844
-
Re: 2009 maxima [captain2]
by allmet33
-
Feb 21, 2008 (12:39 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: captain2 (Feb 21, 2008 12:36 pm)
Okay...but what does sitting in the car have to do with the platform being the basis for another car that's larger???
There are mid-size SUV's that actually use mid-size sedan platforms. The SUV has more size and room in it.
|
- #5303 of 6844
-
Re: 2009 maxima [allmet33]
by louiswei
-
Feb 21, 2008 (7:40 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: allmet33 (Feb 21, 2008 12:34 pm)
There is a difference between...
The Impala is based on the CTS
and
The impalas is based on the CTS platform (which is based on the Sigma platform architecture).
I don't have a problem with the later but I do with the former.
|
- #5304 of 6844
-
Re: 2009 maxima [louiswei]
by allmet33
-
Feb 21, 2008 (12:44 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: louiswei (Feb 21, 2008 7:40 am)
Well...daggonit...I orginally said CTS PLATFORM!!!
From post #5257:
I wouldn't be surprised if the future Impala would be sharing the current Cadillac CTS platform.
|
- #5305 of 6844
-
Re: 2009 maxima [allmet33]
by scwmcan
-
Feb 21, 2008 (1:24 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: allmet33 (Feb 21, 2008 12:44 pm)
Okay, going to jump i here (maybe I shouldn't but oh well). First off aparently the sigma platform cannot be stretched any more than it has been for the STS (which from what I have read is not all that much bigger than the CTS in reality) espically in width, so it may not be a good choice for a full sized Imapla to start with. Secondly the platform is also aparently too expensive to use for a main stream car (I am not sure why, but I know I have read it in at least one of the magazines). Thirdly, if the RWD impala does come, it has alreasdy been stated by GM that it will be built on the Holden platform that is being used by the G8 and will be bult in (I belive) the oshawa ontaion plant that current (or used to) builds the grand prix and it's platfoprm mates, this is the plant that is (was) supposed to be retoolled to manufacture the new Camaro if I recall correctly. At that time the pontiac G8's production is (was) supposed to be moved to the same plant as well. All of this could have change with the apparent annoucement that the car has beeen canceled (which after investing the R&D $ would probably be a mistake on GM's part, but stranger things have happened). I think that GM need to have their two mode hybrid availble in their future full sized RWD cars so that they can meet the CAFE requirement in the long term, but that is just in my opinion.
Scott
|
- #5306 of 6844
-
Re: 2009 maxima [scwmcan]
by allmet33
-
Feb 21, 2008 (1:31 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: scwmcan (Feb 21, 2008 1:24 pm)
Scwmcan...I can respect your posting. I mean...based on what you've stated, I can understand the reasons why not, but...intially, it was merely a thought expressed. It has been posted since I originally posted that the future Impala would most likely be based on the G8 platform...makes sense.
In theory, the CTS platform COULD be used, it just wouldn't be in GM's best interest to do so.
Thanks for the post.
|
- #5307 of 6844
-
Re: 2009 maxima [allmet33]
by captain2
-
Feb 21, 2008 (2:23 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: allmet33 (Feb 21, 2008 12:39 pm)
your post 5297 said that I had said that the CTS platform was too small - what I think I said, instead was that the car was too small - because in that respect you are absolutely right - you could build Noah's Ark on any given 'platform'
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans 
