GM CEO confirms G8 will die with Pontiac
June 6, 2009 by George Skentzos
With its adoptive parent stricken from the General Motors portfolio, it seems the Pontiac G8 is likely to suffer the same fate with General Motors President and CEO Fritz Henderson announcing that the Australian sedan would not be migrated to a new brand.
During a web chat earlier this week on GM’s FastLane blog, Mr. Henderson made it quite clear that the company had no plans to keep the G8 following the company’s restructuring.
Initial speculation – or perhaps more accurately, wishful thinking – had the Pontiac G8 pegged to join the Chevrolet family or perhaps even Cadillac as an entry-level model.
This rumour has been bluntly denied by Mr. Henderson who responded simply with “no.” when asked whether the G8 would live on by a GM employee during the web chat.
Continuing support for the Holden-based G8 was also met with disappointment during a more structured question and answer session with the General Motors President and CEO.
While participating in the session, Robert Hammen posed this scenario to Mr. Henderson:
“I know you have also stated that the G8 won’t be rebadged as another manufacturer’s car (i.e. a Chevrolet). Might I ask you to reconsider. Find a way to take Holden’s next-generation VE platform vehicle, call it the new Chevy Impala, build it at Oshawa alongside the Camaro, and keep the people like me happy.
No economical RWD sedans = no more new GM purchases for me (sorry, a starting-at-$37K CTS isn’t in my price range new). I recognize the problems the new CAFE regulations will present, but there is still a several year window of time to sell a ton of these vehicles (including police/taxi fleets who will have fewer choices when Ford discontinues the elderly Crown Vic/Grand Marquis/Town Car platform). I know fleet ain’t great, but I think you’d sell a ton of these to regular folks, too (what’s the fleet penetration of the current long-in-the-tooth Impala?). Build these on the Flex line at Oshawa, with a mix of models like Holden does (V6, V8, lux, sport, et. al.) and you’ll have a winner on your hands. The platform is simply too good to ignore, going forward. To do so would be incredibly foolish.”
General Motors President and CEO Fritz Henderson responded with the following:
“Robert, I appreciate your comment. Certainly, the G8 is going to be one of the Pontiacs we’ll miss. But, we haven’t closed the door on RWD now or in the future. You point out both the Camaro, which is definitely in the mainstream price range of today’s cars, and the CTS, which is an amazing value in the luxury sport segment. As we map out our future vehicle needs, if we can find the right opportunity and price point to do a world-class RWD car, you can bet we’ll consider it.”
There is a bitter-sweet silver lining with GM still committed to the Australian-developed Chevrolet Camaro, however this does little to improve Holden’s export situation as it is built at GM’s Oshawa plant in Canada.
Print it: 
thats a bit funny,given the now strong rumour about their cops taking the ve.maybe its barrack’s wish…
Anyone else surprised, apart from JEKYL & HYDE?
yeah JEKYL&HYDE thats wat i heard. i heard that Obama wanted to replace the outdated fleet with new Chevvys or possibly the G8, seeing as the G8’s gone GM is probably going to have to adapt the VE platform.
And so it should die. Building these types of cars is the reason GM is now a Gov owned company. Do you think that the American public would be happy if all their billions of tax dollars was going to GM and they still kept on with gas guzzling V8’s like this? IMHO they should have let GM die because it is now another liability aorund the neck of America……..and who knows whaty is yet to come? Holden have some bad news on the way……….believe me.
and by the way,holden,and just about EVERY other car maker,has an order write up as long as a freeway,first bloke brave enough to make them/bring them in will win bigtime.bag him if you like,but mr rudds investment allowance has done more good to the car,and many other small business reliant industries than anything in recent memory.i’ve personally heard of 200-400% increase in potentional car sales,but no-one can supply cause there’s no stock.all this while the rest of the world is still grinding to a stop.go figure…
JEKYL & HYDE, can you please repeat that, in English this time, with capitals, punctuation and spacing in the right places.
captain,
you chalkies are all the same.primary school,secondary school,uni…straight back to primary school.i brought my pillow into king lear class.hope this helps(or you could get involved in the car industry)(is my spellcheak on)(at least i’m not the new generation,replacing 3’s for e’s etc)…
Its understandable for Henderson to say that the VE won’t become a Chev because at this stage its unknown as to exactly which cars will and won’t survive.
However; given how many American car enthusiasts on other wesites like the looks the features and the performance of the VE range I beleive that there is still a possibility of the Commodore becoming an Impala
But until GM has completed its restructuring process – at the moment its a matter of wait and see particularly
with so many rumours and so much speculation around about GMs future
Sorry to disappoint you J & H, never been a chalkie and have been involved in the car industry for 40 years. I admire you for taking your pillow to King Lear (that sort of crap never taught anybody anything) but it does help one’s communication skills to do a bit of homework on basic punctuation.
F6 there are a number of reasons as to why GM are in the financial situation they are at the momnent.. but building a car like the VE Commodore isn’t really one of them –
A more likely reason is that they have/had a number of plants within reasonable proximity of each other operating at less than 70% capacity and building exactly the same or near identical SUV Pick Ups etc [as do Ford].
The difference is that unlike Mullaly and his team at Ford; the “management” at GM were more reactive rather than proactive they became complacent because they believed that everything would workout just as they expected it to.. that is they didn’t have any real contingency plans as to what should do should “X” happen and as they say by failing to plan you’re planning to fail which Waggoner and his team did.
Wheelnut……….well yes it is because of cars like that. Petrol guzzling dinosaur pushrod V8’s are exactly why GM is down the shit hole. Too many small niche vehicles like this ARE a big reason why they are now a taxpayer liability.
F6….you are right.holden lost 80% of export and losing money for the last 4 years…no future for them.if they can’t make money even in boom time….what hope they got now.going…going….gone…
Jekyl and Hyde, you’re making no sense. Is it really so hard to use proper spelling and punctuation? Or at least be a little better for the sake of those trying to read your opinions? I could write better than that when I was six.
It’s a very good thing that GM are killing the G8 in America. If they had not then that would have just been the beginning of their not-really-gonna-change-the-company-at-all restructuring. Maybe there is some hope yet…
Just because the design of the Pushrod V8 may date back to the 1930s-1940s that’s not necessarily a justifiable reason to change is it..
NASA have spent billions of dollars trying to develop a pen that writes in space; The Russians use a Pencil
Sure its not as high tech as most modern cars but the Pushrod V8 is proven to be just as powerful and has alot more potential its easier to extract power from not to mention is cheaper to develop build run and maintain – so why wouldn’t Holden [and Ford who also use Pushrod V8s] continue to use them?
Exactly wheelnut. God forbid there is a bit of variety in the engine landscape.
(And lets not forget the ultra hi tech GTR is still yet to best the pushrod ZR1 at the nurburgring, theres life in it yet..)
Well i wouldnt say a pushrod V8 is easier to get power from……..Holdens 6 ltr American V8 gets the same power as the Ford 5.4ltr………..the only way to increase power is to increase capacity…………apart from super or turbo charging.
Fords new Coyote V8 is only 5 litres and will get the same power as Holdens 6litre………..because it has has DOHC………..much nicer.
I believe it’s a way to get rid of the G8 cars once Pontiac is axed by end of next year. If the demand is high (given that they sell even cheaper than the less thoughtfully built Omegas we have here), the Texas Holden will likely find a new badge. The FWD V8 Chevy needs to be replaced.
Why bother with the V8 when the new LLT engine can deliver 225kw with a 5 litres per 100km better fuel economy.
First DOHC motor = 1914
First true overhead valve motor = 1955
And showing up all those people that think OHC engines are newer technology…PRICELESS
DOHC has a major marketing advantage.
With a valve train (camshaft, lifters, pushrods (if present) rockers, valves and springs) there is an advantage to light weight. A valve will be opening 1500 times a minute (25 times a second) at highway cruising speeds (3000 RPM). If the valvetrain weighs a lot, when the camshaft lifts it, it will just keep on going up until the spring finally catches it. That could be a lot of looseness. It’s called valve float. You can combat that with stronger (and heavier) springs, but the extra weight compounds the problem and the extra pressure from the stronger spring increases wear and the power needed to open the valve.
A good way to fix this is to lower the weight of the valve train. With a camshaft sitting above the valve, all you have is some sort of lash adjuster (lifter) riding on the cam and the lifter rides on the valve. If all the valves are in line, like on an EEK or even a conventional Detroit V8, one cam will open and close the valves quite well.
But, if you open a 2.2, you’ll see that there are actually rockers in there. This adds inertia to the valvetrain, but the payoff here is that the camshaft and its drive sprocket can be a few inches lower, which is good for packaging. It’s not like the 2.2/2.5 reach very high engine speeds. A pushrod engine would have been fine, but since it was an all-new engine, they went OHC.
You can actuate four valves per cylinder with one camshaft by using rocker arms to open one set or both, depends on how you want to do it.
As for DOHC, again, there is an advantage in weight, at an extra cost, both financially and in complexity. It costs more to grind two camshafts than one and it takes more stuff to drive two cams than one. Otherwise, it’s much like SOHC.
Putting the cam in the block and actuating the valves with pushrods (through rockers) works quite well, too. Until recently, every Detroit V8 did it. So did British Leyland engines in Minis and MGs. Even BMWs in the fifties. The main advantage is that, especially in a V engine, there’s only one camshaft. Also, the camshaft drive is a lot shorter which gives better accuracy in timing. Chevrolet is sticking with the pushrod engine because they also tend to be smaller. There’s no camshaft up above and no cam sprocket. On a V engine, that makes it both lower and narrower. It also tends to be lighter.
Another reason is that engineers tend to stick with the tried and true. If you look at a flat-head engine, the camshaft is in the same place as it is in a pushrod engine. All they had to do, theoretically, was put a new head with rockers on the flathead engine, as Zora Arkus-Duntov did with the Ardun heads for the Ford flathead V8. You can also use the camshaft as an auxillary drive shaft inside the engine to run the distributer, oil pump and if present, the fuel pump, just like the EEK engines use a countershaft to do this.
There is a big disadvantage with a pushrod engine, and that’s valvetrain inertia. Everything else being equal, the valves will float at a lower RPM, but for street driving, even extra-legal street driving, that’s not a concern. Roger Penske’s car won the Indy 500 a few years ago with a pushrod engine, while everybody else had DOHC.
You can have four valves per cylinder with a pushrod (cam in block) engine, you just have to get fancy with the rockers and pushrods. If you look at a Chrysler Hemi or even a Poly engine, you’ll see some pretty fancy pushrodding going on, too.
OHC can be simpler, especially with an inline engine. You just use a longer belt or chain to drive the camshaft and skip the pushrods. On a V engine, you wind up with quite a bit more complexity.
It costs a lot to design and certify a completely new engine. And in the end, it’s marketing and cost that drives the design.
What a surprise; a majority US government owned company surviving on money borrowed from the US taxpayers decides that it won’t continue to import cars manufactured overseas.
Obama’s own Democratic colleagues in Ohio said it last wekk:
‘It is unacceptable to ask U.S. workers to subsidize the exportation of their own jobs,” said Representative Dennis Kucinich, Democrat of Ohio, whose district includes Cleveland. “The taxpayers’ investment should be used to protect American plants so that American workers can build the next generation of automobiles.”
Earlier this week Obama said that it was not the intention for US taxpayers money to be used to sustain jobs outside the US:
“US taxpayers’ dollars should stay within the US and it is not intended for taxpayers’ dollars to go offshore”.
Does someone have to spell it out in big black letters; US Government Motors is going to preserve US jobs ahead of jobs in any overseas operation like, I dunno, Holden maybe!
The US realpolitik about the future of GM’s overseas operations is just beginning; and Holden will be the loser.
Pushrod, props for that post, thats a copy/paste for me.
And i agree the US government will look down on v8’s, they simply dont want us driving these cars anymore, but anyone denying that the g8 is a brilliant car and class leader is a moron. Look at edmunds inside line long term test on one, they said on numerous occassions out of all their long term cars, its the one they would own.
That’s right Tom; both insideline and autoblog have done several comparisons with the G8 and a number of other cars and they always comment on how impressed they are with the G8s performance and build quality particularly compared to its more fancied rival.
But then again the people on here who consistently degrade Holden and the Commodore obviously don’t visit these sites.. if they did they would probably ignore all the rave reviews its getting. They find it too hard to believe that something that’s 100% designed and built in Australia could be / is as good as something from Europe or Japan.
The thing is most Australians feel a sense of pride when we take on the wolrd and win [mainly in sport] but unfortunately there are a number of “Aussies” on here who don’t feel the same level of pride when it comes to our cars.. Sad really
Admitadly, the commodore isnt really 100% Australian as it runs an American drivetrain and that is a core component. But still, great drivetrain, great chassis/suspension result in a excellent car.
F6,
Im gonna disagree with you when you say its the “fuel guzzlers” that has GM in trouble, but you are correct that large amount of niche products should cop part of the blame.
In these bad times its every man for himself.
As Bret commented on, the US will not compliment their range of vehicles with foreign made (aussie) vehicles.
The Government wont allow them.
The best chance the VE stands in the US is if they decide to manufacture it on their own soil, and IMO thats what needs to happen. The VE is too good of a product compared to the rest of the GM range to let it fade out into nothing more than a memory.
They need to cut development costs, and the only way is to use the aussie VE “recipe” and make it in the US and in OZ.
Lets face it, and Ive said it many times, even before the shyte hit the fan, Aussie exports of the commodore product will never be kept. It was only ever going to be sent there on a trial basis.
If the volume was ever going to be large enough to be profitable for Holden, The US would quickly put an end to it.
Before the Australian made arguement starts up again..
There’s a difference between the terms [100%] Made in Australia and [100%] Australian Made..
So even though the Commodore isn’t made of 100% Australian components etc [like the falcon and Aurion].. it is 100% Made in Australia – that is the components; from both here and overseas [60/40] are assembled into a final sellable product in Australia – which makes it qualify as Australian Made going by the defininton from the Australian Made Commission.
If 100% of the components in were made in Australia it would be even better. However; it all comes down to volume quality and cost – unfortunately there aren’t enough part suppliers in Australia that can make the various parts required to build a car in the volumes required to the quality expected [not only by Holden but by Customers] at a price which would keep the price of the Commodore competiive.. as no one would pay $50-60K for a entry level Commodore – or Falcon or Aurion
Wheelnut,
Sorry, but I reckon “made in Australia” and “Australian made” means the same thing.
100% assembled in Australia would be more appropriate branding
Also…
QUOTE WHEELNUT…………………
“So even though the Commodore isn’t made of 100% Australian components etc [like the falcon and Aurion]”
That to me implies you are saying the Commodore isnt 100% aussie made but Falcon and Aurion are????
Im sure you didnt mean that……
I agree Andrew M – They could decide to start building LHD Commodores etc in either the USA if not Canada..
However; to do that would involve the cost of fitting out a factory with the same skillet system assembly line and robots that are required to build the Commodore.. not to mention find someone in the USA to make the panels etc.. even more tooling costs
Which could mean that despite the statement that the USA taxpayers won’t allow a company which they effectively own by way of the US Governemnt to compliment their range of vehicles with foreign made (aussie) vehicles..
They may find that its more cost effective / viable to import the Commodore or at least until GMs financial situation improves.
Youre right Andrew M; I guess there was no real need for me to add the bit about the Falcon and Aurion
It’s just that there are so many people on here from the other camps that constantly bag Holden for using parts from overseas.. and I wanted to point out them that their cars are also made of a number of components from overseas and in some cases they use the same suppliers as Holden do.
I’ve told you this once before a few months back Wheelnut and that is that your driveway is a aussie made icon.Lots of oil leaks from your car and possibly a bit of rust to from your leaking cooling system. Remember for it to be all aussie is to be made and assembled here and no imported parts.
Wheelnut,
But things wont improve in the US if they take jobs away and ship them (jobs) overseas to us here in OZ.
Increasing Holdens production will effectively make the US even worse off.
The cost of changing robots and upgrading tooling etc will be cheaper than having to develop multiple models.
Even upgrading their current models inflicts costs to change tooling etc.
Sorry, I just see exporting to the US in volume as a dead end street.
BK: I’ve told you this once before a few months back Wheelnut and that is that your driveway is a aussie made icon.Lots of oil leaks from your car and possibly a bit of rust to from your leaking cooling system.”
All cars leak oil and are supseptible to rust – Holdens Fords Toyotas BMWs etcit all depends on how well they are maintained. However; I wouldn’t expect anything less from you other than your usual Anti-Australian dribble.
BK says: Remember for it to be all aussie is to be made and assembled here and no imported parts.
That’s correct if all the parts are made here it is “Australian made” which is slightly different to “Made in Australia”
The fact you started you comment with “I’ve told you this once before a few months back Wheelnut…” proves how much you love to denograte Australian made cars.
If Push-rod o.h.v are so b…dy wonderful why is it virtually every other car manufacturer has moved on from this “old-inefficient” technology.
Oh funny how G.M think push-rod o.h.v is so great when they’re broke & bankrupt and owe, is it $50Billon dollars to the Govt. woops tax-payer.
Get real “Wheel-Nut”
Ya spot on “F6″
Good-one that the G8 dies with “PONTIAC”
I celebrated with a few JIM BEAN BLACKs at Pontiac demise and again when Hummer was sold. LOL.!
I’m not saying that Pushrod V8s are the bees knees when it comes to automotive engineering – far from it.. What I am saying is why should they change over to DOHC engines when they know how powerful reliable flexible the proven Pushrod engine is? not to mention its popularity.
GM do make DOHC V8s such as the “Northstar” V8 from Cadillac [which was the first company to offer a mass produced V8 - back in 1914].. However; over the years GMs customers have preferred the old Pushrod variety
The thing that annoys me is that when Falcon had its pushrod 6 cyl engine and Holden had the Nissan 6 in the Commode, evry motoring writer bar none hung shit on Ford for having an old pushrod engine. Outdated, inefficient agricultural were just a few names they called it. “this is the 1980’s and a pushrod engine has no right to be in cars with the OHC design being much better in every way ” wrote some reporters.
Well here we are in a new century and GM Holden still have pushrod V8’s. Now, why arent they being lambasted in the way Ford was ………….oh, right, its Holden, its ok for them they are the motoring press favorites.
Just to throw another point into the mix. Aussie made parts on cars go the other way too. The exterior mirrors on our 2003 Mazda 6 are made in Australia. Well, at least that is what the stamping on the underside of them says!
Wheelnut Says:
June 7th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
That’s correct if all the parts are made here it is “Australian made” which is slightly different to “Made in Australia
So how can “Australian made” be slightlty different to “made in Australia”
Please explain this. We are all waiting on you wheelnut.
Hey F6 remember holden have to go back to there 3 litre V6 cause the Falcon 4 litre still will have better fuel economy and F1 performance. Holden running out of technology with GM dead so they need to rely on there asian mojos
BK there is a difference between Made in Australia and Australian Made
“Made In Australia” means the product is substantially transformed in Australia and at least 50% of the cost of production has been incurred in Australia.
“Australian Made” means that near all the components are made in Australia and manufactured in Australia.
Bavarian been busy googling the aussie made defenitions. Hahahaaha
dont forget to tell em all about what is Product of Australia – what does it mean?
Australian Grown – what does it mean?
Can any company use the Australian Made, Australian Grown trade mark?
What about Australian owned?
BK as an Australian designer myself that manufacturers overseas you tend to know the differences between Product of Australia and Made in Australia. Also pretty savvy when it comes to trademarks and design registrations as we export to other Countries.Hope that clarifies my knowledge on the subject!
Now you have been proved wrong so stop being silly!
Your dislike for Holden is noted over the years on this site,we get it.
You know another two manufacturers for car components in Australia last week went bust ? This is happening when we still have 3 locals manufacturing here, how do you think its going to be if it comes down to 2. Ford make a good product in Australia I know that but so do Holden with the Commodore,they are so close it mostly comes down to personal preference these days.
Pilkington is gone ,so Toyota will have to source elsewhere.Also Triden ,they manufacturer for Ford .
Now where is Wheelnuts apology ;)
My understanding that “made in Australia” and “Australian made” are synonymous, and you can even say “Australian made” for products of which 50% of the cost of manufacturer is attributable to Australia.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/l.....s65ab.html
Whereas for something to be a “Product of Australia” requires a much higher threshold to be satisfied.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/l.....s65ac.html
BM is right on the money BK!
Boo Hoo Hooo everybody is crying over what is australian made. To bad we all want junk from overseas.
Sometimes we don’t have a choice BK! The overseas junk is the only thing that is on offer. Look at the textile industry.
Its all got to do with the australian government.One of the main reasons is our government forces up the cost of business here and then buy from the lowest tender usually overseas.
BK,
Most of the balme is to be put on the low Aussie import taxes.
Most other countries tax the hell out of our products before they enter their shores meaning its not attractive for other countries to consume aussie goods like it is for us here in OZ to consume O/S goods.
No, hang on, wait, I thought free trade agreements meant all countries operated fairly…..
NOPE, just silly old Australia becoming the dumping ground.
At least the arse falling out of the Yen might tone the excessive sponsoring of foreign products
“Wheelnut”
Quote”customers have prefered the old push-rod variety”
This is a perfect example how non-complacent G.M has become on how it has treated its customers.
Getting left behind with technology has now cost G.M dearly.
G.M has always felt thet’re right &
The rest of the Automotive World is wrong.
They left their eyes closed for Too Long.
F6
It really bothers you that the GM ‘pushrod’ V8 is a notably better engine than Ford’s current ‘high-tech’ effort, doesn’t it?
You shouldn’t let it trouble you so much…stop obsessing on something so trivial.
In case you haven’t noticed, nobody else is slashing their wrists over this.
Thanks for the support RoFlmaTiC,wasnt it Intellectual Property Law you were studying ?
Sorry, I take that back.
Schah7 is also slashing his wrists over Ford’s mediocre V8.
lol